Departmental Public Expenditure

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if her Department will take steps to assess the effects on  (a) equality of incomes,  (b) equality of assets and  (c) equality of access to services of measures relating to its expenditure under consideration in the Spending Review.

David Jones: The Wales Office will ensure the relevant equality considerations are taken in to account in the context of expenditure under consideration in the Spending Review, in compliance with our obligations under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Answered 11 October 2010

Ministers of Religion

Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last discussed the Act of Settlement with  (a) faith leaders in Scotland,  (b) Ministerial colleagues and  (c) others.

Michael Moore: As the Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform explained in the Adjournment Debate on 1 July 2010,  Official Report, column 1109, the Government have not ruled out any change to the Act of Settlement, but if we are to undertake change, we need to do it in a careful and thoughtful way. Where future change is considered, I will discuss this with my ministerial colleagues, faith leaders and others with an interest in this issue.

Building Schools for the Future Programme

James Wharton: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what representations he has received from Stockton on Tees Borough Council on school building projects; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Gibb: On 5 July the Secretary of State announced a review of all areas of DfE capital spending. Its purpose is to ensure that future capital investment represents good value for money and strongly supports the Government's ambitions to reduce the deficit, raise standards and tackle disadvantage. While he announced that the Building Schools for the Future programme is ending, this does not mean the end of capital investment by this Department.
	The Secretary of State has received a letter from Councillor Mrs Ann McCoy Cabinet, Member for Children and Young People.

Free Schools

James Wharton: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what mechanism will be available to ensure the accountability of new free schools to  (a) Ministers and  (b) parents; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Gibb: We expect the vast majority of free schools to be funded via a funding agreement. As for academies, the funding agreement will set the terms and conditions under which the free school must operate and free schools will be held accountable by the Secretary of State for their performance. We will continue to evaluate the academies and free schools programme. During the passage of the Academies Act we also agreed that we would provide Parliament with regular reports on the progress and performance of the academies and free schools programme.
	In line with other state-funded schools, free schools will be required to collect performance data, publish their results and be inspected by Ofsted. Parents with concerns will be able to request an Ofsted inspection.

Free Schools

David Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to bring forward draft regulations for the registration and monitoring of free schools; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Gibb: Free Schools will be set up as academies under existing legislation and will be held to account in the same way as other academies.

New Schools Network

Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education 
	(1)  what account the appointment of the New Schools Network took of the provisions of  (a) the Public Contracts Regulations 2008 and  (b) his Department's guidance on procurement;
	(2)  whether the exemption from procurement procedures applicable to single tendering was invoked in respect of the New Schools Network;
	(3)  what criteria he used when awarding the New Schools Network a contract; and whether the Compact Commissioning Guidance was taken into account.

Nick Gibb: holding answer 8 September 2010
	On 18 June 2010 the Department agreed to enter into a £500,000 grant agreement with the New Schools Network (NSN) to provide support for groups wanting to find out more about setting-up a Free School. NSN has championed the development of parent and teacher promoted schools and has been providing advice and support to those interested in establishing new schools since 2009, as well as developing networks among interested groups and individuals. This makes NSN ideally placed to fulfil the role for an initial period.
	Officials are currently finalising the grant details which will take account the relevant regulations and agreements.

Placement Orders

Aidan Burley: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many placement orders were authorised by (a) Cambridgeshire County Council and (b) Staffordshire County Council in each of the last three years; and whether the Government plans to review the powers of local authorities to apply for placement orders.

Tim Loughton: The requested information is available as part of Statistical First Release: Children Looked After in England (including adoption and care leavers). Information for 2009 can be accessed via the Department's website at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000878/index.shtml
	Table LAA11 gives information on the number of placement orders granted for each local authority for year ending 31 March 2009. This can be found in the excel link titled (3rd set of additional tables).
	Information for 2008 can be accessed at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000810/index.shtml
	Table LAA11 can be found in the excel link titled (2nd set of additional tables). Information for 2007 can be accessed at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000741/index.shtml
	Table LAA11 can be found in the excel link titled (2nd set of additional tables).
	I am examining the adoption process to consider how best to remove barriers and delays to adoption, but have no immediate plans to review the power of local authorities to apply for placement orders.

Schools: Standards

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Education pursuant to the answer of 6 July 2010,  Official Report, column 193W, on schools: standards, for what reasons his Department does not hold information on which local authorities do not undertake school organisation plans following the removal of the requirement to do so in 2004; if he will make it his policy to collect such information; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Gibb: We have made it easier for Free Schools and Academies to be established by new groups, including outstanding teachers, independently of local authorities. Within that context, we do not see it as part of the role of central Government to collect routine information about proposed school reorganisation plans within local authorities.

Air Pollution: EU Law

Mary Macleod: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she is taking to meet air quality targets in EU legislation.

Richard Benyon: The Government take their air quality obligations very seriously, and is committed to working towards full compliance with the air quality limits set down in EU legislation as soon as possible.
	The UK is now compliant with the EU limits for most air quality pollutants. For particulate matter (PM10), EU limits are already met with the exception of very few areas in London. The Government have been working with the Mayor of London, and in May this year, submitted evidence to the European Commission showing that full compliance with the PM10 limits in London is expected by the extended deadline of 2011 as set out in the EU ambient air quality directive (2008/50/EC).
	Outside of urban areas, much of the UK already meets the EU air quality limits for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) but, along with other EU countries, faces a challenge in achieving the limits in major urban areas, such as London, by the 2010 deadline. We plan to use the provisions in the ambient air quality directive to secure the additional time available (up to 2015) to meet the NO2 limit values. DEFRA is currently in discussions with the Mayor of London, local authorities and other Government Departments, to determine what can be done to achieve the NO2 limit values as soon as possible.

Blackwater River: Footpaths

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she plans to take to protect private property along the Blackwater River from intrusions from the planned coastal path; and if she will make a statement.

Richard Benyon: Under part 9 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 any private property along the Blackwater river will be protected in the same way as any other coastal property that may be affected by proposals for a coastal route. In order to protect privacy, the right of access to coastal land will not apply to any land used as a garden, or any land covered by buildings or the curtilage of such land.
	Any proposals that Natural England may make for the position of the coastal route along the Blackwater river will be discussed with owners and occupiers of affected land. In addition, owners and occupiers will also be able to object to proposals and any such objections will be considered by the Planning Inspectorate.
	The Secretary of State will make the final decision on the coastal route for a particular stretch of the English coast. In doing so she must strike a fair balance between the interests of the public in having rights of access over land and the interests of any person with a relevant interest in any land that might be affected by the new right of coastal access.

Bovine Tuberculosis: Vaccination

Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much her Department plans to spend on vaccines against bovine tuberculosis in  (a) 2010-11 and  (b) 2011-12.

James Paice: Planned expenditure on bovine tuberculosis vaccines during the current financial year (20010-11) is £6.7 million. This includes vaccines research and the Badger Vaccine Deployment Project.
	No decisions on future spend will be made until the results of the spending review are known.

Flood Control

Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has for the future provision of flood prevention services previously provided through the Government Office Network; and what assessment she has made of the likely effects on flood prevention services of the closure of that Network.

Richard Benyon: On 22 July the Government announced their intention in principle to abolish the remaining Government offices subject to consideration of consequential issues, including which Government office functions need to continue. The spending review process is being used to test which activities should continue, and to decide the most cost-effective way of doing this.
	The final decisions on the future of the Government office network, including the transfer of ongoing functions, will be announced at the end of the spending review in the autumn.

Potatoes: Diseases

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many outbreaks of the potato disease Dickeya solani have been detected in England in  (a) 2009 and  (b) 2010 to date; what the origin is of this infection; and what steps her Department is taking to ensure that the outbreak is contained.

James Paice: 'Dickeya solani' is a bacterium (not yet officially named) of the Dickeya genus which affects potatoes. It is already present in Europe and is spreading on seed potatoes of Dutch origin. In consultation with industry representatives, it has been confirmed that quarantine status (i.e. exclusion and control through the EU Plant Health Directive (2000/29/EC)) would not be appropriate for 'D.solani' due to its distribution in the EU. It is controlled; like every blackleg (bacterial disease of potatoes), through visual inspections during seed potato classification. Laboratory analysis is necessary to differentiate the 'D. solani' strain from other blackleg causing strains (Pectobactehum atrosepticum and Dickeya dianthicola). The Seed Potato Classification Scheme (SPCS) includes tolerances for blackleg, including 'D. solani' where these are exceeded the crop involved is downgraded or failed.
	In 2009 there were 16 positive cases of 'D.solani' in England and Wales from seed and ware potato crop samples submitted to the Food and Environment Research Agency (Fera) by growers or Plant Health and Seeds Inspectors (PHSI), who operate the SPCS in England and Wales. The origin of the seed stocks involved was the Netherlands.
	A survey of seed potato crops conducted by Fera during seed potato classification in 2010 has shown that there were 18 (7%) cases of 'D.solani' in England and Wales from 256 seed potato crops showing symptoms of blackleg. In 15 of the 18 cases the seed potatoes-involved originated from the Netherlands. In the other three cases the seed potatoes had been multiplied in England, but the original source of the seed was not traced. Other blackleg causing organisms were responsible for the remaining 238 (93%) of cases in seed potatoes from UK and overseas sources.
	There were also 24 cases, of 'D. solani' in samples of seed and ware potatoes submitted to Fera by growers or Fera PHSI. The origin of the seed stocks in these cases, where disclosed, was the Netherlands.
	In addition to the visual inspections already undertaken in the SPCS for blackleg and the specific survey for 'D. solani' referred to above, Fera is collaborating with the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Crop Research Institute to conduct research on 'D. solani'. This includes a newly proposed three year project funded by the Potato Council and Scottish Executive which incorporates a survey of seed potato crops in England and Wales to further explore the distribution of 'D. solani' within the SPCS. This work will help to determine whether any changes to the SPCS requirements are needed.

Equality: Budget June 2010

Sandra Osborne: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities if she will make an assessment of the effect on  (a) men and  (b) women in Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock constituency of the measures in the June 2010 Budget.

Lynne Featherstone: My right hon. Friend, the Minister for Women and Equalities and I take this issue very seriously. To support Departments in taking account of equality considerations when assessing policy options in the context of identifying departmental savings, Government Equalities Office officials have held a series of advisory meetings with other Government Departments and organised training seminars, one of which was attended by the Regulator, the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
	There are no plans to commission separate work on how the provisions in the Budget will affect men and women for the constituency of Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock.

Females: Low Incomes

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities pursuant to the contribution of the Minister for Equalities of 6 September 2010,  Official Report, column 153, in the adjournment debate on public expenditure reductions (women), what the evidential basis is for the statement that the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) was inaccurate in what it said; and what assumptions made by the IFS are unreliable or invalid.

Lynne Featherstone: In its August analysis of the June Budget the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) sought to include some previously un-modelled reforms. In order to do this, it made some strong assumptions, for example around disability living allowance, housing benefit, and in-year tax credit changes. It is therefore necessary to treat the results of their modelling with appropriate caution, given that the choice of assumptions will have a clear impact on the conclusions reached. The model also omits a number of key policy measures that are difficult to assign to households, but which are likely to impact on incomes and/or employment-for instance, changes to corporation tax and capital gains tax. For these reasons we cannot treat the IFS results as definitive.

Connaught Partnerships

Bill Esterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether he plans to review his Department's policy on the maintenance of housing association propeties to take account of the entry into administration of Connaught Partnerships.

Grant Shapps: No, the Government see no reason and have no plans to revise its policies on the maintenance of housing association properties.
	Since Connaught entered administration large parts of their business have already been bought out by other contractors; Morgan Sindall (who have taken over the majority of the social housing arm) and Centrica (who have bought the electric and gas compliance part of the business). This has safeguarded the majority of jobs at risk following Connaught's collapse.

Local Government Finance

Ben Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what plans he has for the future of the area-based grant; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Neill: Area Based Grant is being considered alongside all other grant funding for local authorities in the context of the current spending review which will set the spending plans for 2011-12 to 2014-15. The outcome of the spending review will be announced on 20 October.
	In June, we removed ring-fencing from £1.2 billion of grants, confirming the Government's commitment to increasing local authorities' flexibility to use their funding to meet locally identified priorities.

Local Government: Pay

Alex Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will discuss with Local Government Employers and unions means of reaching agreement on pay claims for 2011-12 and 2012-13 for local government employees.

Bob Neill: The pay of local government employees is determined by the relevant National Joint Council or Joint Negotiating Committee governing that work force. Central Government plays no role in the pay negotiation machinery involving the employer's side and the trade union side.

Departmental Training

Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much his  (a) Department and its predecessors and  (b) its agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent on employee training in each year since 1997.

Norman Baker: The Department for Transport was formed in 2002, and is made up of a central Department and seven executive agencies. This response covers both the central Department and our seven agencies.
	I regret that the information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost for the following:
	The Department for Transport, the Vehicle and Operator Services, the Vehicle Certification Agency, the Highways Agency and non-departmental public bodies, due to the data not being held centrally.
	A partial response is possible for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA), the Government Car and the Despatch Agency (GCDA), the Driving Standards Agency (DSA), and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) for data held centrally since 2007.
	Please note the following table provides data held for the agencies who commenced recording their training data centrally from 2007.
	
		
			  Training c ourses and  a ids 
			  £ 
			   Financial years 
			   2007-08  2008-09  2009-10 
			 MCA 423,833 567,253 82,265.37 
			 GCDA 138,262 63,712 90,697 
			 DSA 847,464 806,639 625,449 
			 DVLA 1,876,000 1,548,000 1,265,000 
			  Note: The data contained in this table is shown as recorded by our executive agencies. The data relates to formal training that has been logged and recorded centrally; it may not include training which has been booked and paid for locally.

East Coast Railway Line: Rolling Stock

Tom Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans there are for use of Pendolino rolling stock for service on the East Coast Main Line; and what assumptions were made about the availability of rolling stock when the East Coast Main Line 2011 timetable was being prepared.

Theresa Villiers: We are aware of discussions that Directly Operated Railways have had about the use of a new Pendolino set on the east coast main line. This is an operational matter for Directly Operated Railways.
	Additional rolling stock is not required for the operation of the May 2011 east coast timetable, which has been developed on the assumption that it will be operated using the existing east coast fleet.

Fuels: Excise Duties

Grahame Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much his Department paid in fuel duty rebate to  (a) bus operators,  (b) train operators,  (c) air operators and  (d) ferry operators in each year since 2005; what proportion of the fuel duty incurred by each was accounted for by each such rebate in each such year; whether his Department plans to review such rebates as part of the Spending Review; and if he will make a statement.

Norman Baker: The Department for Transport no longer pays Fuel Duty Rebate to bus operators. In recent years, we have paid grant to bus operators in the form of Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG). This is calculated on the amount of fuel used but is no longer linked to fuel duty rates.
	Since 2008, BSOG has been paid at a rate of 43.21p per litre. Operators can receive higher rates for achieving specific outcomes, such as operating smartcard systems or Automatic Vehicle Location systems, and increasing fuel efficiency. An additional BSOG payment is made to operators of low carbon buses.
	Since 2005, total spend on BSOG in England has been as follows:
	
		
			   £ million 
			 2005-06 357 
			 2006-07 367 
			 2007-08 398 
			 2008-09 423 
			 2009-10 430 
		
	
	The Government are considering Bus Service Operators Grant as part of the spending review. Decisions will be made, and announced, in due course.
	The Government have no comparable scheme for trains, boats and planes. However, international airline fuel is not dutiable and diesel fuel for use by train and ferry operators is taxed at the rebated rate of £10.99 per litre. Tax relief is available for ferry operators. Additionally, kerosene is exempt from tax, except where it is for private use.

Railways: Fares

Adrian Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has for the future of the retail price index plus 1 per cent. cap on regulated-fare rail ticket prices.

Theresa Villiers: The Government are committed to fairness on rail fares. However, some tough decisions will have to be made in the spending review which concludes this autumn. The Secretary of State has made clear that a priority for the Government will be protecting investment in the railway and therefore it would be inappropriate to rule out a review of the fare formula ahead of the Spending Review announcement. Further announcements on rail fares will be made in due course.

Aortic Aneurysm: Screening

David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Health by what date he expects the NHS Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening programme to have been fully rolled out; and if he will make a statement.

Simon Burns: It is expected that full national roll out of the NHS Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm screening programme will be completed by the end of 2012-13.

Asthma

Stephen McPartland: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to work together with the devolved administrations on extending the forthcoming National Audit of Asthma Deaths across the UK.

Paul Burstow: The Asthma Deaths Audit is a year-long audit of asthma deaths in England, which is due to commence in 2011. The primary intention is to understand the circumstances surrounding asthma deaths in order that any avoidable factors are identified and ways to avoid such factors are understood and addressed by those designing and providing services for people with asthma in future. These 'lessons' will be communicated to the respiratory community so that practice can change accordingly, and used to inform future policy.
	This study will be undertaken in the tradition of 'confidential inquiries' which have enabled the examination of the circumstances surrounding deaths to be explored in order that changes can be made to future care. In this study, it will not only be the medical care the patient received that will be investigated, but also factors such as awareness in schools and the workplace-where appropriate, environmental conditions prevailing at the time of death, the patient's understanding of their condition and ability to self-manage, and the views of the close family of the person who has died. All these perspectives will help us to understand the circumstances surrounding the deaths, and enable the learning to feed into future policy and services for people with asthma.
	We are in discussions with the devolved administrations about whether they would like to be involved in the Asthma Deaths Audit and are actively exploring the possibility of making the audit cover the whole of the United Kingdom.

Bone Cancer: Children

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department plans to take to improve survival rates of children with osteosarcoma; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Burstow: We want to improve survival outcomes for all cancer patients, including children. It is now generally agreed that the most important reasons for lower survival rates in England compared with other European countries are low public awareness of the signs and symptoms of cancer, delays in people presenting to their doctors, and patients having more advanced disease at diagnosis.
	We have asked National Cancer Director, Professor Sir Mike Richards, to lead a review of the 'Cancer Reform Strategy' (CRS). The review will align the cancer strategy with the White Paper, 'Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS' which was published on 12 July 2010; set the direction for the next five years, taking account of progress since the CRS was published in December 2007; and show how outcomes can be improved.
	Key areas for consideration will be how to increase public awareness of signs and symptoms of cancer to ensure that people are more likely to go to their general practitioner if they experience persistent symptoms, and how we can support primary health care professionals to diagnose cancer earlier.
	The review will consult and utilise the experience of various CRS initiatives, existing advisory groups, cancer charities, industry and professional groups. The Children and Young People's cancer advisory group, co-chaired by both Mike Richards (National Cancer Director) and Sheila Shribman (National Clinical Director for Children, Young People and Maternity Services), will be contributing to the review. We aim to publish an updated strategy in the winter.

Dental Services

Eric Ollerenshaw: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many NHS orthodontists there are per head of population in each primary care trust area in England.

Simon Burns: The information available centrally which is for orthodontists employed by dental hospitals and primary care trusts broken down by strategic health authorities, is in the following table. However, most orthodontists work as independent contractors in primary care settings. In addition, some general dental practitioners also undertake simple orthodontic treatments. Information on the number of independent contractors is not held centrally but relevant information is contained in the "Report of the Orthodontic Workforce Survey of the United Kingdom February 2005", a copy of which has been placed in the Library.
	
		
			  Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS): dental staff in the Orthodontics specialty-as at 30 September 2009 
			  Numbers (headcount) 
			Headcount  Headcount per 100,000 population 
			  England 550 1.07 
			 
			 Q30 North East 36 1.40 
			 Q31 North West 81 1.18 
			 Q32 Yorkshire and The Humber 55 1.06 
			 Q33 East Midlands 47 1.06 
			 Q34 West Midlands 50 0.92 
			 Q35 East of England 37 0.65 
			 Q36 London 122 1.60 
			 Q37 South East Coast 38 0.88 
			 Q38 South Central 27 0.66 
			 Q39 South West 57 1.09 
			  Data quality: The NHS Information Centre for health and social care seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data but responsibility for data accuracy lies with the organisations providing the data. Methods are continually being updated to improve data quality. Where changes impact on figures already published, this is assessed but unless it is significant at national level figures are not changed. Impact at detailed or local level is footnoted in relevant analyses.  Source: The NHS Information Centre for health and social care Medical and Dental Workforce Mid year 2008 Population Estimate (2001 Census Based), Office for National Statistics

Dental Services

Eric Ollerenshaw: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) dentists and  (b) orthodontists on NHS contracts there were in each primary care trust area in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

Simon Burns: The numbers of national health service dentists, as at 31 March 2006 are available in Annex E of the "NHS Dental Activity and Workforce Report, England: 31 March 2006". Annex E provides information by strategic health authority (SHA) and by primary care trust (PCT).
	This information is based on the old contractual arrangements, which were in place up to and including 31 March 2006. This report, published on 23 August 2006 has already been placed in the Library and is available on the NHS Information Centre website at:
	www.ic.nhs.uk/pubs/dwfactivity
	The numbers of dentists with NHS activity during the years ending 31 March 2007 to 2010 are available in Table Gl of Annex 3 of the "NHS Dental Statistics for England: 2009/10" report. Information is provided for England and by SHA and PCT. This information is based on the new dental contractual arrangements, introduced on 1 April 2006. This report, published on 18 August 2010, has been placed in the Library and is also available on the NHS Information Centre website at:
	www.ic.nhs.uk/pubs/dentalstats0910
	These published figures relate to a headcount and do not differentiate between full-time and part-time dentists, nor do they account for the fact that some dentists may do more NHS work than others.
	This measure is based on a revised methodology and supersedes any previously published workforce figures relating to the new dental contractual arrangements. It is not comparable to the information collected under the old contractual arrangements. This revised methodology counted the number of dental performers with NHS activity recorded via FP17 claim forms in each year ending 31 March.
	Separate information of the number of dentists with orthodontic contracts is not available. The following table gives the number of dental staff in the orthodontic specialty employed by dental hospitals and PCTs broken down by organisation. Access to orthodontic services varies between areas. We will be addressing this problem through the introduction of a new dental contract the aim of which is to improve the quality of patient care and increase access to NHS dental services, with an additional focus on improving the oral health of schoolchildren.
	
		
			  Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS): dental staff in the orthodontics specialty by organisation, as at 30 September each year 
			  numbers (headcount) and full-time equivalents 
			2005  2006  2007  2008  2009 
			HC  FTE  HC  FTE  HC  FTE  HC  FTE  HC  FTE 
			  England 552 355 544 362 526 352 548 363 550 380 
			 
			 5C5 Newham PCT - - - - 6 6 3 3 1 1 
			 5CQ Milton Keynes PCT - - 2 2 2 2 1 1 - - 
			 5F1 Plymouth Teaching PCT - - 1 1 1 1 - - - - 
			 5F5 Salford PCT - - - - - - 1 1 - - 
			 5H1 Hammersmith and Fulham PCT 1 0 1 0 - - - - - - 
			 5KG South Tyneside PCT 1 0 1 0 - - - - - - 
			 5M1 South Birmingham PCT 16 14 23 22 22 21 12 12 14 14 
			 5MD Coventry Teaching PCT - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 
			 5NM Halton and St Helens PCT - - - - - - - - 1 1 
			 RA2 Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Trust 7 6 6 5 4 3 6 5 5 4 
			 RA4 East Somerset NHS Trust - - - - - - - - 1 0 
			 RA7 United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust 17 17 26 24 13 13 12 12 14 13 
			 RA9 South Devon Health Care NHS Trust 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 
			 RAE Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 5 4 3 2 6 5 3 2 5 3 
			 RAJ Southend Hospital NHS Trust 5 2 6 2 4 0 4 0 2 0 
			 RAX Kingston Hospital NHS Trust 9 6 8 7 7 6 6 5 6 5 
			 RBA Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust 4 1 5 2 7 4 4 2 6 4 
			 RBD West Dorset General Hospitals NHS Trust 7 3 8 4 8 5 7 5 6 4 
			 RBK Walsall Hospitals NHS Trust 3 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 
			 RBL Wirral Hospital NHS Trust 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 
			 RBN St Helens and Knowsley Hospitals NHS Trust 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RBS Royal Liverpool Childrens NHS Trust 2 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 3 2 
			 RBT Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Trust - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RC1 Bedford Hospitals NHS Trust 3 1 4 1 4 1 - - 2 1 
			 RC3 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust 1 1 - - - - - - - - 
			 RC9 Luton and Dunstable Hospital NHS Trust - - - - - - - - 1 0 
			 RCB York Health Services NHS Trust 5 4 6 3 6 3 6 3 6 3 
			 RCD Harrogate Health Care NHS Trust 4 1 3 0 3 0 4 1 3 0 
			 RCX Kings Lynn and Wisbech Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RD1 Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust 3 2 - - - - 1 1 2 2 
			 RD8 Milton Keynes General Hospital NHS Trust 5 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RDE Essex Rivers Healthcare NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RDZ The Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 8 3 7 3 7 3 6 2 6 2 
			 REF Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 3 3 2 
			 REM Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - 
			 RF4 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust 7 2 7 2 6 2 7 2 6 1 
			 RFF Barnsley District General Hospital NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RFK Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust 2 2 - - - - - - - - 
			 RFR Rotherham General Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RFS Chesterfield and North Derbyshire Royal Hospital NHS Trust 2 1 2 1 4 1 4 1 5 3 
			 RFW West Middlesex University NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RG3 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust 1 0 1 0 3 2 2 2 - - 
			 RGC Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 2 4 3 
			 RGN Peterborough Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 3 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 
			 RGP James Paget Healthcare NHS Trust 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 
			 RGQ Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 
			 RGR West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1 - - 
			 RGT Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 4 2 7 4 7 4 6 3 4 3 
			 RGZ Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 2 - - 
			 RH8 Royal Devon and Exeter Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - 1 1 
			 RHM Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 
			 RHQ Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 9 8 12 8 10 8 11 9 11 9 
			 RHU Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust 6 6 7 7 5 5 4 4 5 5 
			 RHW Royal Berkshire and Battle Hospitals NHS Trust 2 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 
			 RJ1 Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust 7 5 3 3 7 6 5 4 7 7 
			 RJ6 Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust 4 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 
			 RJ7 St George's Healthcare NHS Trust 7 7 6 6 4 4 8 8 7 7 
			 RJC South Warwickshire General Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 
			 RJD Mid Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust 2 0 2 0 2 0 3 1 1 0 
			 RJE North Staffordshire Hospital NHS Trust 4 2 4 2 3 2 5 3 6 4 
			 RJF Burton Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 6 3 
			 RJH Good Hope Hospital NHS Trust 4 2 - - - - - - - - 
			 RJL Northern Lincolnshire and Goole Hospitals NHS Trust 2 0 2 0 3 0 4 1 4 1 
			 RJR Countess of Chester NHS Foundation Trust 7 5 7 5 6 5 7 6 4 4 
			 RJZ King's College Hospital NHS Trust 19 10 7 6 8 7 10 8 13 10 
			 RK9 Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust 6 5 6 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 
			 RKB University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust 7 2 5 1 3 0 3 0 2 0 
			 RL4 Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RLN City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust 4 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 
			 RLQ Hereford Hospitals NHS Trust - - - - - - - - 1 1 
			 RLT George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust 2 0 2 0 - - - - - - 
			 RM1 Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust 6 3 5 3 5 3 6 2 7 2 
			 RM2 South Manchester University Hospitals NHS Trust 7 6 7 6 5 5 4 4 5 5 
			 RM3 Salford Royal Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 - - - - 4 3 
			 RM4 Trafford Healthcare NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RMC Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 
			 RMP Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 6 3 
			 RN1 Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust 4 1 4 1 3 1 3 1 2 0 
			 RN3 Swindon and Marlborough NHS Trust 3 3 2 1 6 1 5 0 5 0 
			 RN5 North Hampshire Hospitals NHS Trust 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 
			 RNA Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 1 
			 RNJ Barts and The London NHS Trust 19 16 23 20 11 8 30 23 27 22 
			 RNL North Cumbria Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 
			 RNQ Kettering General Hospital NHS Trust 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 
			 RNS Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust 2 1 2 1 1 0 - - - - 
			 RP4 Great Ormond Street Hospital For Children NHS Trust 9 8 - - 10 9 10 9 9 8 
			 RP5 Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 6 3 5 3 5 3 - - - - 
			 RPA Medway NHS Trust 4 2 4 3 5 3 6 4 7 4 
			 RPC Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 14 11 8 6 9 8 10 7 6 4 
			 RPL Worthing and Southlands Hospitals NHS Trust 3 0 4 1 4 1 3 0 - - 
			 RPR Royal West Sussex NHS Trust 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 2 - - 
			 RQ3 Birmingham Children's Hospital NHS Trust - - - - - - 1 1 - - 
			 RQ6 Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Hospitals University NHS Trust 7 6 2 1 5 4 9 7 9 8 
			 RQ8 Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - 
			 RQM Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust 1 0 - - - - - - 1 1 
			 RQW Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 - - 
			 RR1 Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust - - 4 2 4 2 4 2 2 1 
			 RR8 Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 16 16 17 16 20 19 16 15 17 19 
			 RRF Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Trust 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 2 
			 RRV University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 23 16 21 17 22 17 29 23 27 22 
			 RTD Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust 9 6 8 6 10 7 10 6 10 7 
			 RTE Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 2 2 9 9 6 6 8 8 9 9 
			 RTF Northumbria Health Care NHS Trust - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 
			 RTG Derby Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 10 6 9 6 9 6 7 5 6 5 
			 RTH Oxford Radcliffe Hospital NHS Trust 6 5 6 5 6 5 5 4 5 4 
			 RTK Ashford and St Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust 2 0 3 0 3 1 4 3 4 3 
			 RTR South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust 18 8 21 8 20 8 23 9 22 7 
			 RTV 5 Borough Partnership NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - 1 1 
			 RTX Morecambe Bay Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 2 1 2 1 4 3 4 3 
			 RV8 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust - - - - 1 1 - - - - 
			 RVL Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust 4 3 3 2 4 3 4 3 6 5 
			 RVR Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RVV East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 RVW North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust 2 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 - - 
			 RVY Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust 4 2 3 1 1 0 3 2 3 2 
			 RW3 Central Manchester and Manchester Children's University Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 6 5 4 3 4 3 4 3 
			 RW6 Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 2 1 2 0 3 2 2 1 2 0 
			 RWA Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 12 5 5 2 6 4 2 1 4 3 
			 RWD United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust 14 6 16 7 17 6 19 8 18 6 
			 RWE University Hospitals Of Leicester NHS Trust 8 5 11 8 9 5 9 5 11 7 
			 RWG West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 3 4 3 
			 RWH East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust 2 0 2 0 - - 4 1 4 1 
			 RWJ Stockport NHS Foundation Trust 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 
			 RWP Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 5 2 6 1 5 3 4 3 3 2 
			 RWW Warrington and Halton Hospitals NHS Trust 6 3 7 3 7 3 10 6 12 6 
			 RX1 Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust - - 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 
			 RXC East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 
			 RXF Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 2 3 2 
			 RXH Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust 3 2 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 3 
			 RXN Lancashire Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 
			 RXP County Durham and Darlington Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 
			 RXQ Buckinghamshire Hospitals NHS Trust 6 4 6 4 7 5 9 6 6 4 
			 RXR East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust 2 1 1 1 5 2 5 3 6 4 
			 RXT Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Trust - - 1 1 - - - - - - 
			 RXW Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust 7 2 7 2 6 2 7 2 8 3 
			 RYQ South London Healthcare NHS Trust - - - - - - - - 5 4 
			 RYR Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust - - - - - - - - 8 3 
			  Note s :  1. "-" denotes zero.  2.  Data quality The NHS Information Centre for health and social care seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data but responsibility for data accuracy lies with the organisations providing the data. Methods are continually being updated to improve data quality. Where changes impact on figures already published, this is assessed but unless it is significant at national level figures are not changed. Impact at detailed or local level is footnoted in relevant analyses.   Source:  The NHS Information Centre for health and social care Medical and Dental Workforce Census.

Departmental Billing

Mike Freer: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average cost to his Department was of processing the payment of an invoice in the latest period for which figures are available; and what proportion of invoices settled in that period his Department paid  (a) electronically and  (b) by cheque.

Simon Burns: The latest available costing data are provided by the 2008-09 UK Audit Agencies benchmarking exercise. This shows a cost of £6.27 per invoice processed by the accounts payable function. The results are not in the public domain but are used internally to measure, compare and improve the value for money of support services across the public sector.
	Analysis of payments made in the period 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010 indicates that a total of 55,166 payments were made, of which 38,047 (69%) were made electronically and 17,119 (31%) by HM Paymaster Payable Order (a cheque equivalent). All the Payable Order payments were made by the Department of Work and
	Pensions on behalf of the Department of Health in respect of payments for medical treatment received overseas. Payment systems are being revised so that all payments will be made electronically by the end of the current financial year.

Departmental Chief Scientific Advisers

Julian Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Health on how many occasions each Minister in his Department has met his Department's Chief Scientific Officer since 6 May 2010.

Simon Burns: Ministers at the Department meet Chief Scientific Officer Professor Dame Sally C Davies regularly in the normal course of business and have done so since 6 May.

Departmental Lobbying

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Christchurch of 13 July 2010,  Official Report, column 706W, on lobbying, which organisations in receipt of public funds from his Department have made representations  (a) directly and  (b) indirectly to his Department on policy issues in each of the last five years; and how much each received from his Department in each such year.

Simon Burns: The information is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Drugs: Advertising

Steven Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will bring forward proposals to end statutory restrictions on the advertising of medicines.

Simon Burns: No. The statutory restrictions have been agreed under European law for the protection of public health. These are designed to ensure that the public is protected from misleading advertising and that health professionals are not offered inappropriate inducements to prescribe or supply medicines.

Epilepsy: Nurses

Diana Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  for what reason his Department has decided not to proceed with the proposed comparative study between a hospital  (a) with and  (b) without an epilepsy specialist nurse to be undertaken by its long-term conditions team;
	(2)  if he will require NHS trusts to collect data on the  (a) costs and benefits and  (b) outcomes for patients of the use of (i) epilepsy specialist nurses and (ii) specialist consultants treating epilepsy patients.

Paul Burstow: This Government have decided not to proceed with the comparative study.
	Department officials, met with epilepsy stakeholders on 1 April 2010. It was agreed that there was already good evidence about the role of Epilepsy Specialist Nurses (ESNs), as well as specialist nurses as a whole. It was also felt that effort should instead be focussed on developing a business case template for commissioners to use to make the case for improving epilepsy services (including the provision of ESNs) as this would have more impact than a comparative study.
	In future, outcomes, which the national health service will be expected to achieve, will be set via the NHS Outcomes Framework, and the NHS Commissioning Board will hold GP commissioners to account for delivery through the Framework.
	Data on the costs and benefits, and outcomes for patients, of the use of epilepsy specialist nurses and consultants are not collected centrally. However, existing guidance published by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence emphasises the role of epilepsy specialist nurses in providing quality care.
	It is the responsibility of local health bodies to ensure that they commission and provide effective services, and to look at the effective use of their workforce, especially under their Quality Innovation Productivity and Prevention programme.

General Practitioners

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to encourage general practitioner practices to work together rather than separately in the same community.

Simon Burns: The White Paper Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS and subsequent engagement document Liberating the NHS: Commissioning for Patients set out our intention to devolve power and responsibility for commissioning services to local consortia of general practitioner (GP) practices. To support GP consortia in their commissioning decisions, we will also create an independent NHS Commissioning Board.
	Under our proposed model, GP practices will jointly form consortia to commission the vast majority of health care required for their local population. However, GP practices will remain independent contractors and therefore able to choose who they work with locally in providing primary medical care to their registered population. Nevertheless, we believe, most practices will see the benefits from working closely within their local community to both commission and provide the best care and appropriate services for the people they serve. That is why practices will have flexibility within the new legislative framework to form commissioning consortia in ways they think will secure the best healthcare and health outcomes for their patients and locality.

General Practitioners: Disadvantaged

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to ensure that general practitioner practices based in areas with high levels of deprivation continue to have access to adequate funding.

Simon Burns: The White Paper Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, sets out the Government's intention that the NHS Commissioning Board will be responsible for allocating national health service revenue resources to general practitioner consortia on the basis of seeking to secure equivalent access to NHS services relative to the burden of disease and disability, and managing an overall NHS commissioner revenue limit. The Board will have an explicit duty to promote equality and tackle inequalities in access to healthcare.

Hospitals: Parking

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Dudley South of 10 June 2010,  Official Report, column 220W, what recent discussions his Department has had with hospital trusts on the effect of car parking charges on people requiring regular outpatient treatment; whether his Department has issued guidance to trusts on their responsibilities in this respect; and if he will make a statement.

Simon Burns: The Department has considered a wide range of views provided in contributions to the recent consultation on national health service car parking, including many hospital trusts. The Government have now published their response, which makes clear that hospitals are responsible for setting their own policy on car parking, taking into account local operational circumstances and local community interests. It also makes clear that local policies should include fair concessions for all patients whose healthcare needs require extended or frequent access to hospital. The response also highlights best practice guidance provided by the NHS Confederation.
	A copy of the Government's response "NHS car parking: response to consultation" has already been placed in the Library.

Medical Records

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to  (a) ensure that patients have greater access to their medical records and  (b) make it easier for patients to change to another general practitioner practice.

Simon Burns: As we made clear in "Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS", published in July 2010, we will enable patients to have control of their health records. This will start with access to the records held by their general practitioner (GP) and over time this will extend to health records held by all providers. The patient will determine who else can access their records and will easily be able to see changes when they are made to their records. We will consult on arrangements, including appropriate confidentiality safeguards, later this year.
	We have also given a commitment that every patient should have a clear right to choose to register with any GP practice with an open list, without being restricted by where they live; that people should be able to change their GP quickly and straightforwardly if, and when, it is right for them, but equally that they can stay with their GP if they wish when they move house.

Medical Treatments

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to ensure that there is not postcode provision for some drugs or treatments.

Simon Burns: The White Paper, Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS, makes clear that we will ensure better access for patients to effective drugs and innovative treatments at a price that secures value for the national health service by moving to a system of value-based medicines pricing when the current pharmaceutical price regulation scheme expires at the end of 2013.
	As interim measures, we have announced an additional £50 million extra funding for cancer drugs in this financial year and we are creating a cancer drugs fund, which will operate from April 2011.

Mental Health Services

Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department plans to take to increase the level of access to long-term support of those with mental health issues.

Paul Burstow: The Government are developing a new strategy for mental health and well-being in England that is based on an alliance of government departments, local government, the independent sector, professions, communities and individuals. It will address services, outcomes from services and wider public health issues. The strategy will support the aims of Equity and excellence: liberating the NHS and forthcoming policy on public health and social care. It will also recognise the needs of people with mental health problems as a whole, specifically the links between mental and physical health and the role of social services.
	Rather than stipulating how services should be delivered at local level, our focus will be on making services patient-led, based on the best clinical evidence, responsive both to patients' choice, and their wish to manage their own care. We want the national health service to deal with the full parameters of a patient's recovery, including helping them return to work and get their life back after illness.
	Our confirmation of the final £70 million instalment of growth funding from the current spending round for the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme is enabling primary care trusts to broaden the geographical coverage of services, meaning more people can get help, and to increase the range of therapies available, giving people more choice and access to the right psychological support.
	Mental health matters for all of us, and we know that mental well-being is linked to physical ,health outcomes, and people's life expectancy, productivity, educational achievement and to potential reductions in violence and crime. The Government will set out its programme for public health in a White Paper on public health later this year, closely co-ordinated with the strategy on mental health. The forthcoming Health Bill will support the creation of a new Public Health Service (PHS), to integrate and streamline existing health improvement and protection bodies and functions. The PHS will aim to secure improvements in the health of the population as a whole, including, of course, the health of people with mental health problems.

Mental Health Services: Equality

Chuka Umunna: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his most recent assessment is of the incidence of racial inequality in the provision of mental health services; and whether he plans to take further steps to reduce that incidence.

Paul Burstow: The figures in the "Count Me In" census for 2009, carried out in March each year by the Care Quality Commission, provides the most recent published statistics on the ethnicity of the mental health in-patient population. We have recently announced that, in the months ahead, we will publish a revised mental health strategy. Reducing inequality is part of that strategy.

NHS

Steven Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to deliver local control of health services; and what steps he plans to take to ensure that such local control is economically efficient.

Simon Burns: The White Paper and subsequent engagement document "Liberating the NHS: Commissioning for Patients" set out our intention to devolve power and responsibility for commissioning services to local consortia of general practitioner (GP) practices. To support GP consortia in their commissioning decisions, we will also create an independent NHS Commissioning Board.
	Under our proposed model, GP practices will jointly form consortia to commission the vast majority of health care required for their local population. This will bring together responsibility for management of care with the management of resources.
	GP consortia will have a high level of freedom and more responsibility and control over commissioning budgets, but in return they will be accountable to the NHS Commissioning Board for managing public funds. The NHS Commissioning Board will hold consortia to account for both the stewardship of national health service resources and for the outcomes they achieve as commissioners.
	In addition, to ensure that local services work together effectively the Government propose to establish new statutory arrangements to strengthen the role of local authorities. Local authorities will have greater responsibility in four areas:
	leading joint strategic needs assessments to ensure coherent and co- coordinated commissioning strategies;
	supporting local voice, and the exercise of patient choice;
	promoting joined up commissioning of local NHS services, social care and health improvement; and
	leading on local health improvement and prevention activity.
	Under the proposals set out in "Local democratic legitimacy in health", local government will have an enhanced responsibility and a statutory duty for promoting partnership working and integrated delivery of public services across the NHS, social care, public health and other services.

NHS

Steven Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to enable clinical professionals to have autonomy in determining which services they provide to patients.

Simon Burns: This Government are determined that health care professionals are empowered to use their skill and judgment to provide the best care and outcomes for their patients from the individual clinical interaction through to design and commissioning of services.
	The White Paper and subsequent engagement document "Liberating the NHS: Commissioning for Patients" set out our intention to devolve power and responsibility for commissioning services to local consortia of general practitioner (GP) practices. To support GP consortia in their commissioning decisions, we will also create an independent NHS Commissioning Board, who will also be directly responsible for commissioning specialist secondary care services and primary care services which would not be appropriate to be delegated to consortia.
	In addition, we published the "Revision to the Operating Framework for the NHS in England 2010-11" on 21 June 2010 setting out our intention to review the clinical relevance of all existing indicators with the removal of those that have little or no clinical relevance.

NHS

Steven Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he plans to take to enable NHS managers to express their views on the management of health service provision.

Simon Burns: Managers' views and experiences of working in the national health service are currently being obtained through the national NHS staff survey, run in all trusts. The survey asks questions about a wide range of issues fundamental to the delivery of quality health services, including aspects related to the management of jobs and individual NHS organisations as a whole.
	In addition, NHS managers are represented on the Social Partnership Forum, which exists to bring together NHS Employers, trade unions and the Department of Health to discuss, debate and involve partners in the development and implementation of the work force implications of policy.
	The Department is also running a full public consultation on components of the NHS White Paper, "Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS", which spells out the long-term vision for the future of the NHS. The views of those who work in the NHS, including managers, will form much of the feedback the Department receives as a result of this major consultative exercise.

NHS: Finance

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he plans to take to safeguard healthcare consortia in cases where a local hospital provider is not able to keep within budget.

Simon Burns: The proposals set out in the White Paper, Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, set out that commissioners will not be expected to provide additional funding for failing providers. If a provider becomes financially unsustainable, Monitor (as the economic regulator) will be able to step in and keep essential services running.
	These proposals are subject to an on-going consultation (which closes on 11 October 2010) and further details are set out in the consultation document. Liberating the NHS: Regulating healthcare providers. A copy has already been placed in the Library.

Obesity

Mary Macleod: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he plans to take to tackle health issues arising from childhood obesity.

Anne Milton: The Government will be publishing a White Paper on Public Health later this year. This will set out plans to tackle obesity and the impact on health and wellbeing of childhood obesity.

Sex: Young People

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what peer-reviewed research studies his Department has evaluated on the extent of high-risk sexual activity by  (a) young homosexual men and  (b) young heterosexual men and women;
	(2)  whether the Health Protection Agency is undertaking research into the degree of high-risk sexual activity by  (a) young homosexual men and  (b) young heterosexual men and women; and if he will make a statement.

Anne Milton: In November 2009, the Department and the then Department for Children Schools and Families published "Teenage Pregnancy and Sexual Health Marketing Strategy", a copy of which has already been placed in the Library. The document sets the evidence from risk factors and a number of research studies to identify the groups most at risk of teenage pregnancy and poor sexual health.
	The Department has also commissioned the Central Office for Information to carry out a review of the existing evidence on the factors that positively or negatively affect sexual health and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) outcomes in the United Kingdom. In addition, the Department made a funding contribution in 2008-09 to the 2010 National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles. This is the third decade in a row that such a study has been completed across the UK and includes 15,000 men and women aged 16-74. The work outlined will help to inform and evaluate interventions designed to improve sexual health status of all people regardless of their age or sexual orientation.
	The Health Protection Agency undertakes surveillance of and supports research in the acquisition of HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), the results of which contribute to the development of policies for HIV and STI prevention. In many of these projects, young people are part of a wider study population. Study data are usually presented stratified by age and sexual orientation. These data have highlighted the high burden of infection, the risk of re-infection subsequent to being diagnosed with an STI and the degree of high risk sexual behaviour among young people.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Brighton

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information his Department holds on the prevalence of sexually transmitted infections affecting  (a) young homosexual men and  (b) young heterosexual men and women in the geographical area closest to the area of Brighton Pavilion constituency for which information is available; and if he will make a statement.

Anne Milton: Data from genito-urinary medicine (GUM) clinics on sexually transmitted infections are collected by gender and not sexual orientation. Diagnostic rates per 100,000 population for men and women in the 15-24 year group within Brighton and Hove City Primary Care Trust (PCT) in 2009 are given in the following table.
	
		
			  Gender  Rate of acute STIs( 1)  per 100,000 population 
			 Males 4,043.9 
			 Females 4,972.3 
			 Total 4,535.7 
			 (1)Acute STIs: Chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis, genital herpes (first episode), genital warts (first episode), non-specific genital infection, chancroid, lymphogranuloma vererum, donavanosis, molluscum, trichomoniasis, scabies and pubic lice.  Notes: 1. Numbers of diagnoses used to compile the rates are not adjusted for missing clinic data.  2. 2008 population estimates have been used to calculate 2009 STI rates  3. Some data reported have unknown PCT of patient residence and are not included.  4. Acute ST1 data presented include diagnoses made in GUM clinics and in community-based settings testing for chlamydia.   Source:  Health Protection Agency, GUMCAD returns, National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) returns, and non-NCSP and non-GUM returns from laboratories. 
		
	
	In 2008, the diagnosed HIV prevalence among all individuals aged 15-24 years resident in Brighton and Hove PCT was 0.04%. It is not possible to estimate the diagnosed HIV prevalence among young people in Brighton by sexual orientation, since the number of young men who are homosexual in this PCT is not known.
	In 2009, there were 1,381 individuals with diagnosed HIV infection resident in Brighton and Hove City PCT of whom 84% (1,159/1,381) acquired their infection through sex between men. Of all individuals with diagnosed HIV infection in Brighton and Hove City PCT in 2009, 2.5% (34/1,381) were aged 15-24 years. The diagnosed prevalence for 2009 will be released later in 2010.

Social Services: Learning Disability

Jim Dowd: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps  (a) his Department has taken and  (b) he plans to take to implement the recommendations of the March 2010 report, Raising Our Sights: Services for adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities, commissioned by his Department.

Paul Burstow: Departmental officials are currently looking very carefully at the detailed recommendations set out in this report and how these support our objectives to improve outcomes for people with learning disabilities who have complex needs and their families. The elements of good service and good practice examples included in this report sit very clearly within the programme of work which Government are leading to support independent living for people with learning disabilities and to support local service planning and commissioning to meet identified needs in their locality.

Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence in what language UK forces are training Afghan  (a) army and  (b) police.

Nick Harvey: UK forces train both the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police using the most appropriate language, usually either Dari or Pashto, with the aid of an interpreter.

Aircraft Carriers

Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the end of service date is for each Invincible-class aircraft carrier.

Peter Luff: Two Invincible Class aircraft carriers currently remain in service with the Royal Navy, HM Ships Ark Royal and Illustrious. HMS Ark Royal is currently planned to be taken out of service in the third quarter of 2014, while HMS Illustrious will reach her out of service date in the second quarter of 2016.
	The future of all major equipment projects are being considered as part of the Defence input to the Strategic Defence and Security Review, to ensure that the programme is coherent with future defence needs.

Armed Forces: Injuries

John Glen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many service personnel have been blinded while on active duty since 2000.

Andrew Robathan: The Ministry of Defence publishes the numbers of personnel categorised as very seriously injured and seriously injured as a result of Operations Telic and Herrick on its website at:
	http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/OperationsFactsheets/OperationsInIraqBritishCasualties.htm
	(Telic)
	and
	http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/OperationsFactsheets/OperationsInAfghanistan BritishCasualties.htm
	(Herrick).
	The figures are updated fortnightly. In addition, we are committed to publishing on a quarterly basis the numbers of service personnel who have suffered limb amputations as a result of injuries sustained while on operational deployment, and DASA published figures up to 30 June 2010 in July 2010. However, in order both to protect the identities of small numbers of patients, including those who have been blinded, and to maintain operational security for the effectiveness of our protective countermeasures, we do not routinely publish very serious injury and serious injury sub-classified by other types of physical injury.

Armed Forces: Pensions

John Stevenson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he plans to bring forward proposals to remove the inequality in pension provision for ex-service men and women who left the armed forces before 1975.

Andrew Robathan: No. It has been the policy of successive governments not to change the provision of a pension scheme retrospectively. Any change cannot be isolated to a single scheme and would affect all of the other public sector pension schemes. It would therefore carry significant cost and simply be unaffordable.

Armed Forces: Uniforms

Lindsay Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence who has responsibility for deciding on the criteria for military clothing standards.

Peter Luff: The Defence clothing team is responsible for overseeing the development and acquisition of operational and non-operational military clothing, less flying clothing and associated equipment. The team seek constant feedback on operational clothing and equipment from the front line, which is used to improve the performance specifications with amendments being approved by representatives from the service user community. For non-operational clothing, the responsibility for specifying clothing standards is usually through uniform committees, which include service user representatives.

Defence: Procurement

Graham Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make an estimate of the effects on the number of people employed in the defence manufacturing sector and the sector's supply chain likely to result from reductions in defence spending in  (a) Hyndburn,  (b) Burnley,  (c) Blackburn,  (d) Pendle,  (e) Preston,  (f) Chorley,  (g) Fylde,  (h) East Lancashire and  (i) Lancashire and the North West.

Peter Luff: We recognise the major contribution made to UK defence by industry throughout the north-west of England. The Department is examining a range of factors, including industrial issues, as part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review, which will conclude in the autumn in coordination with the Government's spending review. It would, therefore, be premature to speculate about the impact of future levels of defence expenditure.

Ex-servicemen: Suicide

Toby Perkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Health on the vulnerability to suicide of servicemen and women leaving the armed forces.

Andrew Robathan: The Ministry of Defence works closely with the Department of Health on issues relating to support to former service personnel with mental health needs, in particular through the Partnership Board which brings together the MOD and the four UK Departments of Health. We are committed to creating effective, through-life, mental health services for our service personnel and veterans and will continue to look at ways in which the NHS, the MOD and the devolved administrations can work together with organisations such as Combat Stress to ensure that they receive the support they need.

Gulf States

Rory Stewart: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent assessment he has made of the security situation in the Gulf; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Harvey: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 13 September 2010,  Official Report, columns 581-82, to the hon. Members for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer) and Battersea (Mrs Ellison).

Carbon Emissions: Public Sector

Christopher Pincher: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps he is taking to ensure other Government departments, agencies and non-departmental public bodies are reducing their carbon emissions and using energy more efficiently.

Gregory Barker: On 14 May my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister set a challenging target of reducing central Government's emissions by 10% in 12 months and asked DECC and the Efficiency and Reform Group to lead this work. Since then, all Departments have submitted their plans for action, detailing how they will contribute towards the target. All ministerial headquarter buildings are now also placing their real time energy use data on line.
	In order to learn from private sector experience, I have established a cross-Whitehall 10% Working Group, which will hold Departments to account for their progress, and has created a network for sharing good practice and experiences between Departments and the private sector.
	In addition, all Government Departments, and many other public sector bodies, are currently registering for the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme, which will help to ensure that energy efficiency is prioritised in the public sector.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if his Department will take steps to assess the impacts on  (a) equality of incomes,  (b) equality of assets and  (c) equality of access to services of measures relating to its expenditure under consideration in the Spending Review.

Gregory Barker: DECC will ensure the relevant equality considerations are taken in to account in the context of expenditure under consideration in the Spending Review, in compliance with our obligations under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975", the Race "Relations Act-1976, and-the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Fuel Poverty

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many and what proportion of  (a) private sector and  (b) social sector dwellings have residents in fuel poverty in (a) England and (b) the geographical area most close to the area of Brighton Pavilion constituency for which information is available.

Gregory Barker: In 2007 there were 2.8 million poor households in England, representing around 13% of all households 2.3 million of these were private sector households (13% of all private households) and 0.5 million were in the social sector (13% of all social households).
	In 2006 the most recent year for which sub-regional figures are available, there were around 5,100 (12%) fuel poor households in the Brighton Pavilion constituency. A split by tenure is not available for this figure.

Magnox Electric

Richard Graham: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what discussions his Department has had with Magnox North Ltd and Magnox South Ltd on the formation of a single site licence company; and by what date he expects legal integration of the two to have been achieved.

Charles Hendry: This is an operational matter for the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which owns the Magnox sites. The NDA has been liaising with Magnox North-Ltd and Magnox South Ltd-on their reintegration into a single-site licence company (SLC). Reintegration of the two SLCs is a key part of the overall plan of the Parent Body Organisation, EnergySolutions, which owns the SLCs, to reduce the-costs of managing the sites on behalf of the NDA and to ensure that more money is spent on front-line activities. The programme aims for relicensing into a single SLC to be complete by the end of 2010.

Magnox Electric

Richard Graham: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what the cost to the public purse was of dividing Magnox Electric into Magnox North Ltd and Magnox South Ltd.

Charles Hendry: The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority estimate that the total costs of separating Magnox Electric into two site licence companies (SLCs) were approximately £6.4 million. Reintegration of the two SLCs is a key part of the overall strategy of the parent body organisation, EnergySolutions, which owns the SLCs, to reduce the costs of managing the sites on behalf of the NDA. It is estimated that reintegration will deliver net savings of around £10 million per year.

National Grid: Fees and Charges

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what the average national grid transmission charge is in each local authority area.

Charles Hendry: Transmission charging zones do not correspond with local authority boundaries and therefore it is not possible to give an average figure for each local authority area. Details of the different charges for each generation and demand charging zone can-be found on national grid's website at:
	http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/B757A2EA-CEEA-4A37-B9CA-91A0F0C68C5F/40465/UoSCI6R0Final.pdf

National Grid: Fees and Charges

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much has been raised in national grid transmission charges from generators in  (a) England,  (b) Scotland and  (c) Wales in each of the last five years.

Charles Hendry: National grid do not have separate figures for England and Wales. Transmission Network Use of System charges paid by generators in England/Wales and Scotland are:
	
		
			  £ million 
			   England/Wales  Scotland 
			 2005-06 159.0 126.8 
			 2006-07 188.5 128.8 
			 2007-08 200.9 141.0 
			 2008-09 231.4 147.9 
			 2009-10 232.1 156.9 
			  Source: National Grid

Natural Gas: Storage

Edward Miliband: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change when his Department plans to take steps to provide greater gas storage capacity for the UK.

Charles Hendry: As set out in the Annual Energy Statement, we need more gas storage capacity, as well as more gas import capacity and greater assurance that our market will deliver gas when it is needed. The Department has already taken steps to encourage greater gas storage capacity for the UK.
	On 9 September, I gave consent to the Saltfleetby gas storage project. This has the capacity to store some 700 million cubic meters of gas and to increase the UK's storage capacity by over 15%.
	Further, as set down in the recent written ministerial statement about planning reform by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Communities and Local Government, the Government are reforming the planning system. Planning applications for major infrastructure projects will be decided by Ministers within a clear policy framework provided in national policy statements, on the basis of recommendations by the new major infrastructure planning unit. This will make major infrastructure decisions, such as for new gas storage facilities, faster and more transparent.
	Gas storage facilities will also be encouraged through new measures to be introduced in the Energy Security and Green Economy Bill.

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority

Richard Graham: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority since its formation.

Charles Hendry: The Department closely monitors the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's (NDA) performance through regular reports and meetings, including between DECC Ministers and the NDA's chairman and CEO. The NDA is required by the Energy Act 2004 to have a ministerial approved strategy and annual business plans. These, together with reports on its progress to date are available on the NDA's website.
	Before the NDA was set up in 2005 there was little investment in the legacy infrastructure or progress with decommissioning. Starting from a zero base, in its first five years the NDA has made significant progress in tackling the unprecedented challenge that it faces. It has:
	developed a detailed understanding of the legacy, introduced industry-wide procedures across its sites to plan on a consistent basis and completed the re-structuring of its estate to facilitate its competition programme;
	successfully completed competitions for the management of the low level waste facility near Drigg; and for Sellafield-one of the largest and most complex procurements in the world. These have brought international capability to the UK and the new management teams are bringing significant improvements in operational efficiency, project management and cost control;
	made significant headway in realising value from its commercial operations;
	progressively prioritised funds towards highest hazards; delivered value for money by driving efficiency and performance across its estate and invested in skills to build the future capability of the UK's nuclear work force; and
	made steady progress on decommissioning in line with its published business plans.

Nuclear Power Stations: Safety

Richard Graham: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what hazard reduction work it commissioned Magnox Electric to undertake in each year between its establishment and its separation into two companies in 2008.

Charles Hendry: This is an operational matter for the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which took over responsibility for the Magnox sites on 1 April 2005. These sites are operated for the NDA under a management and operations contract with the site licence company, Magnox Electric. The NDA agrees work plans annually with Magnox Electric, including work on hazard reduction. Details of the work commissioned from each Magnox site are set out in the NDA's Annual Plans. Performance against these plans is set out in the NDA's Annual Report and Accounts. These documents are published and are available on the NDA's website.

Wind Power: Electricity Generation

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the effects on potential windfarm developers of the decision by the National Grid to retain the current charging regime for electricity generators; and what recent discussions he has held with Ofgem on the matter.

Charles Hendry: National Grid have made no recent decisions on the transmission network use of system (TNUoS) charging regime for generators, but are currently considering: the responses to a consultation on a review of intermittent generation charging. DECC's-recent Annual Energy Statement also announced that Ofgem will shortly be conducting their own independent review of the transmission charging regime.

Departmental Contracts

Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the monetary value is of contracts his Department has awarded to each  (a) management consultancy and  (b) IT company since 7 May 2010.

Chris Grayling: The information requested is as follows:
	 (a) The monetary value of all management consultancy contracts awarded since 7 May 2010 is £134,503.
	In the period 7 May 2009 to 20 September 2009 the total value all management consultancy contracts was £6,029,698.
	 (b) No new IT contracts have been awarded since 7 May 2010.

Fuel Poverty: Chronically Sick

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what financial support his Department provides for terminally ill people in fuel poverty.

Steve Webb: The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) currently have the governmental lead on fuel poverty. Their main grant-funded programme is the Warm Front scheme, which can provide a package of tailored insulation and heating improvements and energy advice for private sector households across England. The scheme is aimed at vulnerable, fuel-poor households, some of whom may be terminally ill. Eligibility is determined by receipt of certain means-tested and disability benefits, including disability living allowance (DLA). The number of disabled people receiving Warm Front assistance has increased since 2005-typically, approximately 38% of all those receiving help are in receipt of either DLA or attendance allowance (AA).
	DLA and AA provide people who have severe disabilities with a contribution towards the extra costs they face because of the effects of their disabilities. People who are terminally ill automatically qualify for the highest rate care component of DLA (they do not have to serve the three-month qualifying period and the benefit is usually paid within 10 days from receipt of claim) or the higher rate of AA. Recipients of DLA or AA have the choice to spend their benefit according to their own priorities, and in a way that best suits their circumstances, including meeting the cost of household fuel.
	Terminally ill people may also receive support through employment and support allowance (ESA). While ESA for the most part uses functional descriptors to assess someone's eligibility for the benefit, there are some non-functional descriptors that would find someone eligible-terminal illness is one of these non-functional descriptors. If someone claims ESA under 'special rules', which apply to those who have a life expectancy of no more than six months, they will be fast-tracked to the ESA Support Group and receive the highest rate of benefit. This will be done on paper-based evidence alone without the claimant having to undergo a face-to-face medical assessment or serve any of the normal assessment phase of ESA.
	Additional help is available to people receiving any of the income-related benefits through the disability premia included in these benefits. Cold weather payments are also available to help certain vulnerable people-including those receiving the main phase of income-related ESA or disability premia in the income-related benefits-with the extra heating costs which result from very cold weather in their area.

Incapacity Benefit

John Woodcock: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether his Department has changed the level of funding allocated for retesting and transition of incapacity benefit claimants to employment and support allowance since May 2010.

Chris Grayling: The retesting and transition of incapacity benefit claimants to employment and support allowance introduces a new process to DWP. As a consequence, funding has been estimated having regard to departmental forecasting and resource allocation models. Such models are regularly updated to provide the most accurate data possible for the new process. The accuracy of the data will be reviewed regularly following national implementation of the new process. However, at present the funding allocation for IB (IS) Reassessment has not fundamentally changed since May 2010.

Maternity Pay

Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the number of payments of statutory maternity pay which included a component representing a bonus otherwise payable to the employee in each of the last three years; and if he will estimate the cost to the Exchequer of the payment of such components in each such year.

Maria Miller: The first six weeks of statutory maternity pay is paid at 90% of a woman's weekly earnings (with no upper limit) averaged over a set period. Employers are legally required to calculate the amount using earnings actually paid in that period and the dates of that period must be worked out according to how a woman is paid. This will generally capture eight weeks actual earnings for weekly paid women or two months earnings for monthly paid women around the fourth to sixth months of pregnancy. For some women a bonus or commission is a regular, integral part of their pay and this may be included in the calculation.
	A breakdown of the components making up an individual's pay is not required to be reported. However, payments of statutory maternity pay are liable to audit by HMRC
	in the usual manner.

State Retirement Pensions

Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 8 September 2010,  Official Report, columns 599-600W, how many people who were in receipt of a full state pension before 6 April 2009 had not accrued the full number of entitlement years by means of national insurance (NI) contributions and had bought back years or entitlement by way of their former spouses' NI contributions.

Steve Webb: Latest data show that, at the end of September 2009, 1.9 million people receiving a full basic state pension did so because of derived entitlement from their late spouse.
	 Notes
	1. The figure is for people in Great Britain only.
	2. The figure includes recipients of Category B pension. The figure does not include cases where the national insurance contribution record of an individual's former spouse has been substituted for the individual's own record to improve their basic state pension.
	3. The figure is for individuals reaching state pension age on or before 30 September 2009. These individuals are not affected by changes to the calculation of entitlement to the basic state pension for people reaching state pension age from 6 April 2010.
	 Source
	DWP, Information Directorate: 5% sample administrative data

Afghanistan: Overseas Aid

Douglas Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to the answer of 27 July 2010,  Official Report, column 267W, on Afghanistan: overseas aid, which areas of expenditure to which the additional £200 million funding announced for Afghanistan are to be allocated were previously administered in whole or in part by the  (a) Foreign and Commonwealth Office and  (b) Ministry of Defence.

Andrew Mitchell: The additional £200 million funding announced for Afghanistan, as mentioned in my answer of 27 July 2010, will provisionally be allocated for (a) improving security and political stability; (b) economic stability, growth and jobs, and (c) helping the Afghan Government deliver vital basic services.
	These areas of expenditure were previously and continue to be administered by the Department for International Development (DFID).
	A more detailed description was included in my written statement of 21 July 2010,  Official Report, column 18-20WS.

Bangladesh: Overseas Aid

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much funding his Department has provided to  (a) the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and  (b) the government of Bangladesh in respect of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh in each of the last five years.

Alan Duncan: The Department for International Development (DFID) has not provided funding to the United Nations Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) or the Government of Bangladesh specifically in respect of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh.
	DFID supports Rohingya refugees through core contributions to UNHCR, which manages the official camps; UNICEF; the World Food Programme; the World Health Organisation; the United Nations Population Fund; and the European Union.
	Core funding to UNHCR was £20 million in 2005, and £19 million per year from 2006 to 2009. This funding is designed to strengthen UNHCR's capacity to meet its mandate globally, including assisting Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Douglas Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much money his Department allocated to  (a) the Stabilisation Aid Fund,  (b) the Conflict Prevention Pool,  (c) the Discretionary Peacekeeping Fund,  (d) the BBC World Service, excluding the BBC World Service Trust,  (e) the BBC World Service Trust,  (f) the Special Reserve,  (g) the British Council and  (h) the Security and Intelligence Fund in each year since 2005.

Andrew Mitchell: The following table shows the Department for International Development's (DFID) expenditure on the BBC World Service Trust and the British Council from 2005-06 to 2009-10. DFID funding to the British Council includes our contribution to the Commonwealth Scholarships and Fellowships Plan (CFSP), which is administered by the British Council on behalf of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). DFID has not provided any funding to the BBC World Service in any year since 2005.
	
		
			  £ million 
			   2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09  2009-10 
			 BBC World Service Trust 6.7 8.5 5.3 2.2 6.7 
			 British Council 25.3 29.4 29.5 26.2 33.2 
		
	
	From 2008 the Africa Conflict Prevention Pool and the Global Conflict Prevention Pool were merged into the Conflict Prevention Pool (CPP); and the Stabilisation Aid Fund (SAF) was created. In 2009 the CPP and the SAF were merged to form the Conflict Pool. The Conflict Pool is funded from a separate HM Treasury settlement, managed jointly by DFID, FCO and the Ministry of Defence (MOD), and not from Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL). DFID funding to the Pool is laid out in DFID's Resource Accounts.
	In the last two financial years, DFID has also provided an additional £1.5 million per year to the Conflict Pool from its core DEL for conflict prevention activities in Sri Lanka. Also, in Financial Year 2009-10, Departments contributed a total of £20 million from their DELs to support stabilisation activities in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, of which £11.5 million came from DFID. DFID did not allocate money for discretionary peacekeeping, the Single Intelligence Account or the Special Reserve in any of the given years.
	DFID resources allocated to the Conflict Pool over the period from 2005-06 to 2009-10 are therefore as follows.
	
		
			  £ million 
			   2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09  2009-10 
			 Conflict Pool 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,5 13.0 
		
	
	DFID has not allocated any money to the Special Reserve or Single Intelligence Account in any year since 2005.

Developing Countries: Health Services

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent reports he has received on the effects of shortages of health workers in less developed countries on rates of  (a) tuberculosis,  (b) HIV/AIDS and  (c) malaria.

Stephen O'Brien: The Department for International Development (DFID) has not received any recent reports referring specifically to the effects of health worker shortages on rates of TB, AIDS and Malaria. However, there is a clear body of evidence that the global shortage of health workers, amounting to as many as 3.5 million, affects the poorest countries most. The high rates of AIDS, TB and Malaria in many less developed countries will be controlled only through a comprehensive approach to health service delivery that addresses health worker numbers, skills and deployment, essential drugs and commodities and early prevention, accurate diagnosis and quality treatment.
	DFID is currently developing plans to accelerate its support to malaria control and to reproductive, maternal and newborn health. Health workers are an important dimension in addressing these priorities, and it should be noted that AIDS, TB and malaria cause a large proportion of maternal mortality. These business plans will be released in early 2011.

International Assistance

Jo Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the outcomes of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals Review summit in New York in September 2010.

Andrew Mitchell: The United Nations Millennium Development Goal summit was a success. It generated unprecedented global commitments to save 16 million women and children, reverse the spread of malaria and tackle hunger and under-nutrition.
	In his speech to the General Assembly, the Deputy Prime Minister took the opportunity to showcase overall UK leadership on international development issues. He reiterated the UK's commitment to reaching 0.7% of GNI in aid from 2013 and challenged others to live up to their promises.

International Assistance: Maternity Services

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the MDG+10 summit outcome document upholds internationally-accepted human rights standards.

Andrew Mitchell: The Department for International Development (DFID) played an active role in negotiating the outcome document, which provides an action framework for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, focusing global efforts over the next five years towards the achievement of basic human rights, such as access to health care and primary education.
	During negotiations DFID pushed for a clear focus on results and accountability, which are essential to upholding human rights standards. This was included in the document and .my Department will ensure the momentum generated at the summit is carried forward. DFID will play an active role in the annual review mechanism in the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and in other international fora, such as the G20.
	The outcome document can be accessed on the DFID website at:
	http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Media-Room/News-Stories/2010/Outcomes-from-the-MDG-Summit/

International Assistance: Maternity Services

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the MDG+10 Summit outcome document calls for reproductive health services to be made publicly available and affordable to all non-discriminatory, non-coercive, sensitive to age and lifestyle and adequately funded.

Andrew Mitchell: The outcome document stresses the need to focus on the Millennium Development Goals that are most off-track, such as maternal health. During negotiations, the UK consistently pushed for the document to call for the fullest possible access to reproductive health services and commodities. We are committed to improving sexual and reproductive health and rights, including access to modern family planning as a way of empowering women and promoting women's choice in the developing world.
	The outcome document can be accessed on the Department for International Development (DFID) website at:
	http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Media-Room/News-Stories/2010/Outcomes-from-the-MDG-Summit/

International Assistance: Maternity Services

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development whether the UK delegation to the MDG+10 Summit includes  (a) members of civil society groups and  (b) hon. Members with expertise in sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Andrew Mitchell: The UK delegation to the UN Millennium Development Goal Summit was led by the Deputy Prime Minister and myself. We were supported by senior officials from my Department with expertise in sexual and reproductive health and rights. Both the Deputy Prime Minister and I met with representatives of civil society groups ahead of and throughout the summit. I will also be meeting with representatives of civil society groups on 12 October to discuss the outcomes of the summit.

Overseas Aid: Drugs

David Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much his Department has paid to  (a) the International Harm Reduction Association and  (b) others to support harm reduction drug treatment overseas in the last five years; and what assessment has been made of the effectiveness of such payments.

Stephen O'Brien: The Department for International Development (DFID) has committed £2,230,252 over five years ending 30 September 2011, in support to the International Harm Reduction Association (IHRA). DFID has also supported the provision of HIV services for injecting drug users through bilateral programmes in Bangladesh, Burma, China, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, Vietnam and the central Asia region, and through support to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. It would entail disproportionate costs to collect information on the amount spent on these individual harm reduction programmes as they are part of broader public health programmes.
	All programmes funded by DFID are reviewed annually against agreed performance indicators and targets to ensure progress and assess impact and effectiveness. An independent annual review of IHRA was last conducted in December 2009 which demonstrated significant impact.

Pakistan: Floods

Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which organisations have received aid funding from his Department to assist following the floods in Pakistan in July 2010.

Andrew Mitchell: Details of organisations funded by the Department for International Development (DFID) in response to the Pakistan floods are available on the Floods Monitor on DFID's website at:
	http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pakistanfloodsmonitor2010
	To date, DFID has provided direct funding to six UN agencies: the International Organisation for Migration (IOM); the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA); the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF); the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); the World Food Programme (WFP) and the World Health Organisation (WHO). Funding has been provided to the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to support their flood relief efforts. My Department has also supported five non-governmental organisations (NGOs) who are responding to the Pakistan floods: Concern Worldwide; InfoAsAid; the International Medical Corps; Oxfam and Save the Children, as well as two consortia of NGOs: the Consortium of British Humanitarian Agencies and the Rural Support Programmes Network. DFID provides regular core funding to the following agencies who have also responded to the Pakistan floods: the European Commission Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO) and the UN Central Emergency Response Fund.
	Today I have laid a written statement before the House, committing an additional £70 million to support relief efforts in Pakistan. Allocations of these additional funds will be made in due course and published on the Floods Monitor.

Burma: Crimes Against Humanity

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will take into account the findings of the report by the Irish Centre for Human Rights entitled Crimes against Humanity in Western Burma: The situation of the Rohingyas in developing his Department's policy on Burma; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Browne: The Government take careful note of reports such as this one, which documents the appalling human rights abuses endured by the Rohingya ethnic group. We are working to highlight their plight, and seeking to end impunity for such abuses, through the UN Human Rights Council and UN General Assembly.

Departmental Official Hospitality

Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much his Department spent on hospitality for events hosted by each Minister in his Department in July 2010.

Alistair Burt: Nil spend for July 2010 on hospitality events for the Minister for Europe (Mr Lidington), the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Mr Bellingham), the Minister of State (Mr Browne) and Lord Howell.
	My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary hosted events for visiting Foreign Ministers at a cost of £1,976 charged to Government hospitality.
	I hosted lunch at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) for Arab ambassadors at a cost of £263 to the FCO budget.

Departmental Secondment

Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many staff his Department has appointed on secondment since 7 May 2010; and from what organisation each such member of staff has been seconded.

Alistair Burt: Since 7 May 2010, 50 staff have joined the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on loan from Departments including HM Treasury, UK Border Agency, HM Revenue and Customs and the Ministry of Defence.

Ejup Ganic

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions the Government has had with the government of Serbia on the judgement given by Mr Tim Workman, Senior District Judge at the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court on 27 July 2010 in the case of the Government of the Republic of Serbia v. Ejup Ganic.

David Lidington: The Government have had no discussions with the Government of Serbia on the judgment given in the case of the Government of the Republic of Serbia  v. Ejup Ganic.

India: Foreign Relations

Jo Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he has taken to sustain and develop relations with India following the Prime Minister's visit in July 2010.

Alistair Burt: The visit to India by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and ministerial colleagues in July 2010 formed an excellent basis on which to develop an enhanced partnership with India. The Government have worked since the visit to take this forward at all levels. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Immigration visited India in August 2010 and the coming months will see visits by my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Defence and International Development, and my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Universities and Science. Officials and members of the business community are in the final stages of establishing forums to pursue mutual trade and investment interests. And co-operation on science, education and climate change is ongoing. People to people links also remain important and my ministerial colleagues and I look forward to meeting a visiting delegation of Indian parliamentarians on 14 October 2010.

Pakistan: Ahmadiyya

Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions his Department has had with the government of Pakistan on the attacks on Ahmadiyya Muslims in Mardan, Pakistan on 3 September 2010; and if he will make a statement.

Alistair Burt: The UK condemns all attacks against religious minorities in Pakistan, whenever and wherever they happen.
	The attacks on Ahmadiyya Muslims in Mardan on 3 September 2010 are a further example of the persecution suffered by this religious group. They follow the horrific attacks in Lahore on 28 May 2010, in which over 90 people were killed. These attacks were condemned by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, and our high commissioner in Islamabad raised the discrimination suffered by the Ahmadiyya community with the Chief Minister of Punjab alongside his EU colleagues. I have spoken directly to the Pakistani Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti, and to encourage Pakistan to fully guarantee the fundamental rights of all Pakistani citizens.

Sri Lanka: Human Rights

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the internal inquiry by the Sri Lankan government into human rights abuses.

Alistair Burt: We welcomed the Government of Sri Lanka's 'Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission' (LLRC) which is examining the causes of the conflict in the period 2002 to May 2009 when it was set up, but also stressed that it should investigate fully allegations of war crimes. We will continue to closely monitor progress on human rights issues, given the need for a credible process which addresses UK and international concerns.

UK Permanent Representative to EC

Douglas Carswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs under what powers of prerogative Kim Darroch was appointed UK Permanent Representative to the EU.

David Lidington: The appointment of the UK's Permanent Representative to the EU is made in accordance with Diplomatic Service Order in Council 1991, which also covers other appointments of senior ambassadorial rank.

Vietnam

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will place in the Library a copy of the strategic partnership agreement with Vietnam; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Browne: A copy of the Strategic Partnership Declaration has been placed in the House of Commons Library.
	Speaking after the signing of the declaration on 8 September my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary said: "Today's agreement with Vietnam is yet another example of the UK's commitment to pursuing an active foreign policy with emerging powers around the world. This partnership will bring more direct links between our universities, closer co-operation on serious and organised crime and will continue our frank dialogue on human rights. It is also a real boost for British businesses looking to invest in Vietnam."

Courts: Attendance

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the effect on the level of attendance in court of  (a) defendants,  (b) witnesses and  (c) police officers of his proposals to close magistrates courts.

Jonathan Djanogly: I do not anticipate that the court closure proposals will have a significant effect on attendance in court of defendants, witnesses or police officers.
	There is no evidence to suggest that travel distance to court is a significant cause of defendants failing to appear. Defendants are expected to attend court when summoned and courts may take into account travel considerations for defendants and witnesses when listing cases.
	Ministry of Justice economists are currently working on the provision of area wide impact assessments that will provide a full assessment of the costs and benefits of each closure. These will include an assessment of the travel impact on court users, police and probation and solicitors funded by legal aid.
	We intend to publish the impact assessments alongside the consultations responses, by the end of the year.

Courts: Offenders

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what proportion of defendants changed a plea before trial at  (a) magistrates courts and  (b) the Crown court in the latest period for which figures are available.

Jonathan Djanogly: In the second quarter of 2010, around 26,000 defendants entered a plea and were dealt with in trial cases at the Crown court. Of these defendants, around 16% of defendants changed their plea before the first substantive hearing. The second quarter of 2010 is the latest period for which statistics are available.
	Information collected centrally about defendants in trials at the magistrates courts does not record whether their plea was changed prior to the trial taking place.

Courts: Yorkshire

Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he plans to announce the outcome of his consultation on the future of court services in North and West Yorkshire, with particular reference to Skipton Magistrates Court and Skipton County Court.

Jonathan Djanogly: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr Clarke) hopes to announce decisions on the proposals for the future provision of court services in England and Wales to Parliament by the end of the year.

Departmental Contracts

Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the monetary value is of contracts his Department has awarded to each  (a) management consultancy and  (b) IT company since 7 May 2010.

Jonathan Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice has awarded two IT contracts and one management consultancy contracts since 7 May 2010.
	The IT contracts were as follows:
	
		
			  Company  Contract purpose  Contract value (£000) 
			 AMTEC (IT) Implementation of electronic working arrangements in the Royal Courts of Justice 270 
			 PWC (Consultancy) Provision of actuarial modelling techniques to analyse options and scenarios under consideration as part of the Spending Review, 250 
			 CACI Ltd (IT) Development and application support for computer system for 7 years. 4,000

Departmental Press: Subscriptions

Mike Freer: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department spent on newspapers, periodicals and trade profession magazines in each year since 2007.

Kenneth Clarke: The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) subscribes to many different periodicals and professional magazines (hard copy and online via individual purchase and subscription) for both staff and the judiciary in order to keep up to date with the latest news and thinking in a wide range of professional areas, including law, corporate services and job specific roles.
	Accounting systems for the MOJ, HMCS, Tribunals Service and OPG do not differentiate between soft and hard copy purchases. The same account codes also include some library purchases such as books and it would incur disproportionate costs to separate these costs out. The natural account codes for the National Offender Management Service do not differentiate between purchased publications and publications created for their organisation.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if his Department will take steps to assess the effects on  (a) equality of incomes,  (b) equality of assets and  (c) equality of access to services of measures relating to its expenditure under consideration in the Spending Review.

Jonathan Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice will ensure the relevant equality considerations are taken in to account in the context of expenditure under consideration in the spending review, in compliance with our obligations under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Immigration Appeals Commission

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the remit is of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission.

Jonathan Djanogly: The Tribunals Service, an Executive agency of the Ministry of Justice, is responsible for providing administrative support to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC). SIAC deals with appeals against decisions of the Secretary of State for the Home Department (a) to deport, or exclude, someone from the UK on national security or public interest grounds and (b) on issues of citizenship as set out in the British Nationality Act.

Legal Aid: Contracts

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what negotiations the Legal Services Commission has undertaken with  (a) parties to the 2007 Unified Civil Contract for legal aid services and  (b) parties who are not party to the contract in respect of any extension to it; and on what dates and with whom such negotiations took place.

Jonathan Djanogly: On 3 September, representatives from the Legal Services Commission (LSC) met with representatives from the Law Society to discuss a short extension to the Unified Contract (Civil). This was agreed at a further meeting between these two organisations on 6 September. In accordance with the terms of the Unified Contract (Civil) Standard Terms, a short consultation with the other main representative bodies (Advice Services Alliance and the Legal Aid Practitioners Group) then followed. Formal notification was then posted on the LSC's website on 13 September and issued by email to existing contract holders. Discussions in relation to the contract extension were therefore all held with parties that are not holders of the Unified Contract (Civil) but their representative bodies.

Medway Secure Training Centre: Conduct

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many  (a) internal,  (b) external and  (c) police investigations into the conduct of staff were conducted at Medway secure training centre in each year since 1998; and what the outcome was of each investigation in respect of which any legal proceedings have been completed.

Crispin Blunt: Medway Secure Training Centre (STC) conducts an internal investigation for every allegation made against the conduct of staff and following any referrals made to its local Children's Services Team. External investigations are carried out by the local Children's Services Child Protection Team (CSPT), who will involve the police for investigation when this is deemed necessary.
	There were no legal proceedings as a result of any investigation carried out by the CSPT. Using these criteria the figures are as follows:
	
		
			   Internal  External  Police 
			 2001 13 0 0 
			 2002 19 1 0 
			 2003 50 13 0 
			 2004 32 7 0 
			 2005 37 5 0 
			 2006 26 4 0 
			 2007 31 2 0 
			 2008 19 0 0 
			 2009 34 0 0 
			 2010 26 0 0 
		
	
	Data prior to 2001 is unavailable for the purpose of this question.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time.

Medway Secure Training Centre: Restraint Techniques

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether any injuries were sustained as a result of the use of restraint techniques on boys held in Medway secure training centre since 1998.

Crispin Blunt: All secure establishments submit monthly data returns to the Youth Justice Board (YJB) on the number of injuries from restrictive physical interventions (RPI). Data on injuries are reported against common definitions of minor injury requiring medical treatment (which includes cuts, scratches and grazes) and serious injury requiring hospital treatment (which includes fractures and loss of consciousness).
	Data have been collected on the injuries arising from an RPI since April 2007 and these figures have been provided in the table. These include both of the above categories of injuries. Data are not available broken down by gender.
	
		
			   Injury requiring medical treatment 
			 2007-08 67 
			 2008-09 38 
		
	
	The data from 2009-10 will be available following the publication of the 2009-10 Annual YJB Workload statistics in January 2011.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time.

Offenders: West Midlands

Margot James: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people with addresses in  (a) the metropolitan borough of Dudley and  (b) the metropolitan borough of Walsall are (i) in prison, (ii) on probation and (iii) in secure accommodation.

Crispin Blunt: The information requested is set out as follows.
	 Prison
	Information on a prisoner's residence is provided by prisoners on reception into prison. If no address is given on first reception in to prison, various proxies are used to determine a home address, including using the next-of-kin address and the committal court address. These figures are included in the answer.
	As of 10 September 2010, based on this information there were 254 people in a prison or young offender institution with a recorded address in the metropolitan borough of Dudley and 297 people in a prison or young offender institution with a recorded address in the metropolitan borough of Walsall.
	These figures include male and female prisoners, adults, young offenders and juveniles and those who are sentenced and on remand.
	 Probation
	Staffordshire and West Midlands Probation Trust record the total number of offenders managed in the community with recorded address in the metropolitan boroughs of Dudley and Walsall.
	At the end of August 2010, based on this information there were 679 people who had received a community sentence and were being managed in the community by the Probation Service with an address in the borough of Dudley. On the same date there were 672 people who had received a community sentence and were being managed in the community by the Probation Service with an address in the borough of Walsall. These figures include both males and females.
	 Secure Accommodation
	The Youth Justice Board do not record the local authority of a young person's home address. The Youth Justice Board does however hold data on the youth offending team (YOT) attached to the young person. The following table shows the number of people under 18 who are attached to Dudley and Walsall youth offending teams (YOTs) in secure accommodation on 10 September 2010
	
		
			   Dudley YOT  Walsall YOT 
			 Secure Children's Homes 0 0 
			 Secure Training Centres 1 4 
			 Total 1 4 
		
	
	All data has been drawn from individual administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time.

Prisoners' Release

Susan Elan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many offenders serving a custodial sentence for a violent crime were  (a) released on licence and  (b) re-arrested for a further violent offence while under licence in each of the last five years.

Crispin Blunt: The following table shows the number of offenders serving a determinate sentence for violence against the person released on licence over the last five years (2005 to 2009).
	
		
			   Number 
			 1 January to 30 June 2009(1) 4,524 
			 2008 9,622 
			 2007 8,600 
			 2006 8,014 
			 2005 8,265 
			 (1) Data for the second half of 2009 are not available. 
		
	
	Information is not held centrally for offenders arrested for a further violent offence while under licence.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Prisons: Wales

Guto Bebb: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his policy is on proposals for the construction of a new prison in North Wales.

Crispin Blunt: In October 2009, the Ministry of Justice began a site search for sites suitable for 1,500 place prisons in the priority areas of north west England, north Wales, west Yorkshire and Greater London as part of the new prisons programme. A number of sites in north Wales have been put forward.
	We will ensure that we meet prison capacity requirements more efficiently to improve value for money for the taxpayer and contribute savings to help reduce the budget deficit and the new prisons programme is consistent with those objectives.

Reoffenders

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what mechanism he plans to introduce for payment by results schemes to reduce re-offending rates among offenders; and if he will make a statement.

Crispin Blunt: The Government are committed to introducing payment by results as part of a new approach to offender rehabilitation. We plan to commission providers to work with offenders to reduce reoffending, paid for by the subsequent savings generated in the criminal justice system.
	The Social Impact Bond at HMP Peterborough, launched on 10 September 2010, is an example of the innovative approach we want to take towards reducing reoffending.
	Officials in the Ministry of Justice are developing proposals for the introduction of further payment by results approaches. The outcome of this work will be published for consultation in the forthcoming Green Paper on offender rehabilitation.

Secure Training Centres: Restraint Techniques

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice on how occasions restraint techniques have been used on  (a) boys and  (b) girls for the purposes of maintaining good order and discipline in secure training centres in each month since April 1998.

Crispin Blunt: The following table shows the use of restraint for reasons of good order and discipline by month and gender. Data on the reasons for restraint have only been collected centrally by the Youth Justice Board since April 2008. Data are only available up to July 2008, as changes to the secure training centre (STC) rules made at this time precluded STCs from using restraint for the purposes of good order and discipline.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time.
	
		
			  2008 
			  Month  Total  Male  Female 
			 April 2 0 2 
			 May 0 0 0 
			 June 3 1 2 
			 July 9 4 5 
		
	
	I would like to also draw attention to two answers given by my predecessor the hon. Member for Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle) to the then hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) on 15 June 2009,  Official Report, columns 67-70W, and to the then hon. Member for Cardiff North (Julie Morgan) on 12 October 2009,  Official Report, columns 164-66W, which referred to the reasons for restraint. In these answers the number of restraints for reasons of good order and discipline in STCs in April 2008 was given as four. This was incorrect due to a data error and should have been two, as per the answer in the table above. These two occasions are for Rainsbrook STC and Medway STC should read as 0.

Sentencing: Wales

Jonathan Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the outcomes of the intensive alternatives to custody pilot schemes in South Wales and Dyfed/Powys;
	(2)  whether he plans to extend the implementation of the intensive alternatives to the custody scheme pilot.

Crispin Blunt: The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) has commissioned several independent studies of the intensive alternative to custody (IAC) projects, including the South Wales and Dyfed/Powys schemes. One study will establish whether an impact evaluation will be feasible and affordable. Depending on the outcome, and available resources, a proposal for an outcome evaluation on reoffending will be submitted for approval to the Ministry of Justice Research Quality Assurance Board and costs agreed with lead policy officers.
	At present there are no plans to extend central funding for IAC past the end of the pilot in 2011. However, each of the pilot areas is looking at ways that IAC could be mainstreamed within existing resources.

Broadband: North East and North West

Ian Swales: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he has made of the proportion of households in  (a) Redcar constituency,  (b) the North East and  (c) the North West which will have access to next generation broadband in each of the next five years.

Edward Vaizey: This Department has not made such estimation for these areas. The Government are committed to ensuring the UK has the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015, including the delivery of superfast broadband to rural and remote areas at the same time as in more populated areas.

Business Links: Redcar

Ian Swales: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many businesses operating in Redcar constituency contacted Business Link in each of the last five years.

Mark Prisk: In the Redcar and Cleveland local authority area, Business Link had contact with the following number of businesses in the last five financial year periods. The following data is based on the number of unique customers assisted throughout the year, and represents customers who have received support through the Information, Diagnostic and Brokerage (IDB) service.
	
		
			  Financial year  Number of customers assisted 
			 2006-07 520 
			 2007-08 354 
			 2008-09 537 
			 2009-10 589 
			 2010-11(1) 273 
			 (1 )YTD. 
		
	
	In the North East, the Business Link service has been delivered by Business and Enterprise North East since April 2007. The figures prior to that date are based on data obtained from the Business Link Tees Valley Customer Record Management system. Business Link does not hold data at constituency level.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will take steps to assess the effects on  (a) equality of incomes,  (b) equality of assets and  (c) equality of access to services of measures relating to its expenditure under consideration in the Spending Review.

Edward Davey: The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills will ensure the relevant equality considerations are taken in to account in the context of expenditure under consideration in the spending review, in compliance with our obligations under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Employment Schemes

Matthew Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he made of the annual cost to the Exchequer of continuing the Job Guarantee scheme.

Chris Grayling: I have been asked to reply.
	Any estimate of the cost of the jobseeker's guarantee was always subject to review as part of the Spending Review process to ensure good value for money. The cancellation of the scheme announced on 17 June was therefore not to save money. Rather, funding was never allocated to the jobseeker's guarantee in the first place.

Extractive Industries: Disclosure of Information

Tessa Munt: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills 
	(1)  what recent discussions he has had with his European counterparts on the introduction of a requirement for stock exchanges within the EU that all extractive companies listed disclose all payments to foreign governments; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what assessment his Department has made of the merits of the introduction of a country-by-country reporting standard of the type proposed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB); what recent discussions he has had with the IASB on the matter; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  if his Department will make an assessment of the effect on the UK extractive industry of the provisions of the US Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 2010 on disclosure of payments made to foreign governments; and if he will make a statement.

Edward Davey: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has not had any discussions with his European counterparts about the disclosure of payments to foreign governments by the extractive industries.
	The Secretary of State has noted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 2010 on disclosure of payments made to foreign governments, but also notes that both the IASB and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are both investigating international approaches to this kind of disclosure.
	The IASB is an independent standard setter for global accounting standards. The UK Government have not engaged in any discussions about the specific content of accounting standards with IASB. There has been extensive engagement by UK stakeholders directly with the IASB on this issue.
	The Government will consider action when they see the outcomes of these investigations, but note that international approaches are likely to work better than any national approach.

Genetically Modified Organisms: Public Consultation

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what projects on public attitudes to genetically-modified crops, food and feed have been funded by the  (a) Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council,  (b) Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council,  (c) Medical Research Council and  (d) Science and Technology Facilities Council since 1997; what the (i) topic, (ii) start date, (iii) cost and (iv) project code was of each such project; who the main contractor was in each case; and which such projects have been completed.

David Willetts: Some of BBSRC's public engagement activities since 1997 have included consideration of GM technologies, some of which  (a) explicitly invited public views while others  (b) were focused more on communication and raising awareness.
	 (a) BBSRC's public engagement activities which have included consideration of GM technologies and explicitly invited public views:
	A co-sponsor of 'Future foods' exhibit at the Science Museum from November 1997 to March 1998
	Interactive exhibition launched at the 1998 Royal show on GM that provided a focus for people to consider the issues and record their opinions
	A display at the 1999 Royal Society Summer Science Exhibition that invited discussion on GM crops and their uses
	Public consultation (with NERC) on gene flow in plants and micro-organisms in 2000
	In 2000 BBSRC commissioned a short study of attitudes to GM bioremediation that made use of a novel tool, the Ethical Matrix.
	In 2001 BBSRC hosted a web-based tool that explored hypothetical novel foods as part of a Foresight Food Chain and Crops Industry Panel initiative
	In 2003 BBSRC held a consultation on the future direction of crop science research
	The recent synthetic biology dialogue, published in June 2010 covered public views on agri-environmental science as one part of a workshop that explore views around science and technology generically. A later workshop with in the synthetic biology dialogue explored food and crop applications of synthetic biology.
	 (b) BBSRC's public engagement activities which have included consideration of GM technologies and were focused more on communication and raising awareness:
	In 1999 BBSRC published two discussion documents on issues surrounding the use of GM in agriculture
	In 1999 BBSRC supported an BA and Royal Society of Edinburgh forum that debated GM foods
	In 2001 BBSRC supported a public evening meeting that accompanied the EUCARPIA XVI congress in Edinburgh, the meeting covered issues surrounding plant biotechnology
	A panel discussion on future renewable bio-energy, including artificial photosynthesis in 2007
	BBSRC has also supported its funded researchers through a small grants scheme to engage with the public, some of these grants have been used to discuss issues around GM, for instance: a 1998 discussion meeting on GM with the National Federation of Women's Institutes; a 2003 series of schools debates on 'genetic futures'; and a 2005 public discussion in Plymouth on GM.
	None of these Research Councils have funded a separate research project specifically into public attitudes on GM since 1997. However, under the previous Government, the Food Standards Agency was asked by Ministers to carry out a public dialogue project looking at Food - the use of GM. Government have recently announced that this dialogue will not continue in its current format. The details of the Government's policy on the use of GM technology in food and agriculture are still being determined, but all policies will be based on robust evidence. Developing effective and appropriate public engagement will need to be an element of this.

Research: Finance

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps he plans to take to support research and development activity in the UK.

David Willetts: The Coalition Agreement makes it clear that we are committed to working with universities, research councils and business to enhance the effectiveness of the innovation system to support successful UK innovation. We are considering the recommendations from Sir James Dyson's Report' Ingenious Britain' including refocusing the R&D Tax Credit on high tech, small firms and start ups and will consult with business in the autumn.
	The Research Councils, Universities and the Technology Strategy Board support research and development activity across all the important sectors of the UK and with those that offer the greatest scope for boosting UK growth and productivity.

Research: Finance

Jack Dromey: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he has made of the monetary value of Government funding allocated to scientific research projects undertaken at each institution in each Research Assessment Exercise category in each region in 2009-10.

David Willetts: Quality-Related research funding from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) is awarded formulaically to English institutions on the basis of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). This funding also provides incentives for working with businesses and charities, and for supervising young researchers. Full details of HEFCE's research grant funding to individual English institutions for 2009-10 and 2010-11 can be found at:
	http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/funding/
	The Higher Education Statistics Authority (HESA) publishes data annually on the research income received by individual higher education institutions from the Funding Councils, Research Councils and from a range of other public and private sources. The latest available data is for 2008-09:
	http://www.hesa.ac.uk/

Antisocial Behaviour

Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will bring forward proposals for a national guarantee for  (a) swift police force responses to complaints of anti-social behaviour and  (b) stronger enforcement of antisocial behaviour orders.

Nick Herbert: holding answer 13 September 2010
	My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced a review of antisocial behaviour on 28 July. We will come forward with proposals in due course.

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to her speech at the Coin Street Community Centre on 28 July 2010, what the evidential basis was for her statement that young people regard an anti-social behaviour order as a badge of honour.

Theresa May: Research carried out by the Youth Justice Board into anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) in 2006 found that:
	"ASBOs functioned as a 'badge of honour', rather than addressing the causes of the behaviour".

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions she has had with police officers and professional bodies on the impact that anti-social behaviour orders have had on anti-social behaviour since their introduction.

Theresa May: holding answer 9 September 2010
	Home Office officials are in constant dialogue with police and other professional bodies about a wide range of issues related to antisocial behaviour, including the effectiveness of tools and powers such as the antisocial behaviour order.

Antisocial Behaviour Orders: Cannock Chase

Aidan Burley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many anti-social behaviour orders were  (a) issued and  (b) breached in Cannock Chase constituency in each of the last three years.

Nick Herbert: The latest available data on the number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued and breached covers the period 1 April 1999 to 31 December 2008. Data collected centrally by the Ministry of Justice on the number of ASBOs issued and breached are not available below Criminal Justice System (CJS) area level.

Counter-terrorism: Powers

William Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps she plans to take to ensure the proportionate use by public authorities of powers available to them under anti-terrorism legislation.

Nick Herbert: The Government are committed to ensuring that there are safeguards within the legislation to prevent the misuse of counter terrorism and security legislation.
	My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced a review of counter terrorism and security powers and measures on 13 July 2010,  Official Report, columns 797-809. The purpose of the review is to look at the balance between security and civil liberties in relation to the most sensitive and controversial powers and, consistent with protecting the public and where possible, to reduce the powers assumed by the state.

Criminal Records

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent estimate she has made of the average time taken for an organisation to obtain the results of Criminal Record Bureau checks; what steps she plans to take to reduce the time taken to undertake such checks; and if she will make a statement.

Lynne Featherstone: holding answer 16 September 2010
	The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) was established under Part V of the Police Act 1997 and was launched in 2002. The service provided by the CRB enables organisations across England and Wales in the public, private and voluntary sectors to make safer recruitment decisions by identifying candidates who may be unsuitable for certain work, especially roles that involve working with children and vulnerable adults.
	The performance of the CRB is measured against a number of Published Service Standards (PSS) which include to issue 95% of Standard CRB checks within 10 days and 90% of Enhanced CRB checks within 28 days.
	In the last period for which figures are available, August 2010, the number of days the CRB took on average to complete an Enhanced check is 27.7. This figure includes the data for Enhanced applications handled by the CRB where the data provided on the application form are complete and there is no requirement to write to the registered body for clarification of information.
	The average length of time taken to process a Standard certificate is unavailable as the data are not collated by the bureau. Standard applications represent only 4% of all applications received and the CRB are currently exceeding their PSS in relation to these checks, issuing 99.8% in 10 days.
	At present the CRB is issuing 88.2% of Enhanced certificates within the 28-day PSS. There can, however, be a number of factors that can affect the timely completion of CRB checks, including but not restricted to:
	the length of time it can take for an employer to deal with and submit the initial application;
	the accurate completion of the application form;
	the clarity of the information provided, and
	the existence of conviction or non-conviction information and the operational effectiveness of the disclosure units of the police forces involved in the CRB checking process.
	The CRB works very closely with the police in demand planning and addressing the problems associated with delays. It does this by:
	working with police forces on issues such as recruitment needs and lead-in times, retention of staff, IT systems and capacity, accommodation constraints and local force vacancies;
	where police forces get into difficulty the CRB support them in developing recovery plans to reduce the build up of work, and
	proactively manage and report performance on a weekly basis across all police forces
	Over the past 12 months the CRB have been working with forces to reduce the backlog of older cases.

Departmental Billing

Mike Freer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average cost to her Department was of processing the payment of an invoice in the latest period for which figures are available; and what proportion of invoices settled in that period her Department paid  (a) electronically and  (b) by cheque.

Nick Herbert: The Home Office processes its invoices through the Ministry of Justice Shared Service Centre.
	The average cost for 2009-10 (the latest full year figures available) was £6.98 per invoice. This was the cost of the Shared Service Centre teams directly involved with processing the invoice and their share of the overheads.
	The proportion of invoices paid electronically during 2009-10 was 98.48% and the proportion paid by cheque during 2009-10 was 1.52%. This is the last full financial year data available.

Departmental Furniture

Matthew Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many chairs her Department has purchased in each year since 1997; how much it spent in each such year; and what the five most expensive chairs purchased in each such year were.

Nick Herbert: From available records, the following table lists the requested information for the Department's headquarters at 2 Marsham street. Earlier information is not available.
	
		
			   2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09  2009-10 
			   Number  £  Number  £  Number  £  Number  £  Number  £ 
			 Number and costs of chairs 412 112,249 49 20,293 8 4,019 4 2,468 68 27,017 
			
			 Five most expensive chairs (number purchased) 2 780 1 595 1 765 1 685 1 690 
			  1 774 4 431 1 694 1 684 2 675 
			  2 286   1 659 1 678 1 655 
			  1 427 1 423 1 652 
			  1 416 
		
	
	The additional chairs were generally purchased to enable additional staff to relocate to 2 Marsham street resulting in substantial cost savings from the disposal of other offices.
	The majority of the most expensive chairs were acquired following occupational health assessments recommending the provision of orthopaedic chairs to meet users' specific needs. This enables the Department to meet its duty of care to its staff and to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.

Detention Centres: Children

Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to page 21 of the Coalition Agreement, what steps she plans to take to end the detention of children for immigration purposes.

Damian Green: holding answer 14 September 2010
	The Government are committed to ending the detention of children for immigration purposes. Our aim is to achieve this in a way which promotes the welfare of children while ensuring the return of families who have no right to be in the UK. Significant progress has been made and we are now piloting new approaches. We are also continuing to work on alternative ways of securing the removal of those families who refuse to comply with our new approach.

DNA: Databases

Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the likely effects on police time and resources of the move to the Scottish model of DNA retention as referred to in the Coalition Agreement.

Theresa May: Police time and resources will be taken into consideration as part of the policy development process and a full impact assessment will be published alongside the Freedom Bill when it is introduced.

Domestic Violence

Helen Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps her Department is taking to assist victims of domestic violence.

Lynne Featherstone: We are currently working across Government to discuss the best approach to tackle violence against women and girls, including domestic violence and will be publishing a Strategy in the spring.
	We have already committed to the following;
	An extension to a Home Office pilot project for victims of domestic violence with no recourse to public funds until the end of March 2011 and a commitment to find a long-term funding solution to the issue.
	£3.5 million in 2010-11 to contribute to the funding of Independent Domestic Violence Advisers, Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conferences and some wider work to tackle violence against women.
	Funding contributions to a network of Help lines in 2010-11.

E-Borders Programme.

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what timescale she has set for securing an alternative supplier to deliver the e-Borders programme following the termination of the contract with Raytheon.

Damian Green: No time scale has been set for securing an alternative supplier to deliver the e-Borders programme; we are working with the existing supplier, Raytheon Systems Ltd, and other companies to conclude arrangements in this regard and this will enable planning to be finalised and determine the applicable timetable.

E-Borders Programme.

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what timescale she has set for the completion of the e-Borders programme.

Damian Green: No time scale has been set for completion of the e-Borders programme as this will be determined by approval of the business case through applicable governance mechanisms.

E-Borders Programme.

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what timescale she has set for the inclusion of passenger name record checks in the e-Borders programme.

Damian Green: Passenger name record checks are presently being considered for inclusion in the programme as part of the business case process; no time scale has been set for the inclusion of these checks in the e-Borders programme as this is dependent on approval of the business case.

Firearms

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what statistics her Department collates about the use in crime of legally-held firearms.

James Brokenshire: The Home Office collects data on the number of offences in which firearms were reported to have been used. Since April 2007, homicides that were committed using a licensed firearm are reported to the Home Office. For all other offence types, it is not possible to determine whether the weapons involved were held on certificate.
	From 1986 to 1996-97, firearm offences data collected centrally did not include reference to whether weapons were held legally or illegally. Attempts were made between 1997-98 and 2003-04 to collect this data, but there were concerns over their quality and it is not in a form suitable for publication. There is a difficulty for the police being able to identify whether a firearm used in an offence was legally or illegally held, particularly if that firearm was not retrieved. As a result, the data for this period were not published. Because of these concerns, and following consultation with police force representatives, the data ceased to be collected centrally from 1 April 2004.

Missing Persons

Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which police forces do not supply day to day data to the Missing Person's Bureau on people who have been missing for more than 72 hours.

Nick Herbert: Of the 46 English and Welsh police forces (including the islands), 40 provide the UK Missing Persons Bureau with data manually or by automatic transfer, 36 of these on a consistent basis. Of the eight Scottish forces, three provide data, one of these on a consistent basis.
	The bureau does not receive data notifications from the following police forces unless specific case details are requested: City of London police, Norfolk constabulary, Northumbria police, South Yorkshire police, Guernsey police, Isle of Man constabulary, Central Scotland police, Dumfries and Galloway constabulary, Fife constabulary, Northern constabulary, Tayside police and the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Of the special police forces (as referred to in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005), the British Transport police provide some manual notifications on an irregular basis.
	None of the armed forces/military police forces provide notifications to the bureau.
	The variation in supplying data reflects the staged implementation of the code of practice requiring data to be provided. Forces have shown willing in working towards full compliance and the bureau is supporting them through this transition.

Missing Persons: Unidentified Bodies

Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many unidentified bodies were successfully matched against reports of missing persons in 2009-10.

Nick Herbert: A total of 67 unidentified bodies were successfully matched against reports of missing persons in 2009-10.
	This figure reflects data held centrally. In accordance with the Code of Practice, police forces are required to notify unidentified people, bodies and body parts to the Bureau within 48 hours. Consequently, bodies which are identified within 48 hours may not be reported to the Bureau.
	The data provided is management information, and has not been formally assessed for compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.

Police Authorities

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 3 June 2010,  Official Report, column 79W, on police authorities, under what budgetary headings the amount spent on the administration of Essex Police Authority was incurred; and if she will make a statement.

Nick Herbert: Essex police authority have now published their statement for accounts, and it is available on their website. This shows the authority spent £235,000 on allowances, £119,000 on their Community Safety Partnership grant, £237,000 on internal audit, £18,000 on banking charges, £576,000 on staffing and £149,000 on other costs.

Police: Accountability

Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what advice she received from professional bodies in formulating her proposals for directly-elected police commissioners.

Theresa May: The Home Office has engaged constructively with our policing partners, including the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Association of Police Authorities, on the development of our proposals to introduce police and crime commissioners in England and Wales. These proposals were set out in the 'Policing in the 21st Century' consultation ore the close of the consultation period on 20 September 2010.

Police: Overtime

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much overtime was paid to police officers working additional hours  (a) on days they were scheduled to work and  (b) on a scheduled rest day in each of the last three years.

Nick Herbert: The Home Office does not hold this data.

Police: Wolverhampton

Emma Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers were based in Wolverhampton North East constituency  (a) in 1997 and  (b) on the latest date for which information is available.

Nick Herbert: Police personnel data are not collected at constituency level. There were 7,113 police officers in West Midlands Police Force as at 31 March 1997 and 8,536 police officers as at 31 March 2010. Figures are provided on a comparable basis.
	The Basic Command Unit (BCU) of Wolverhampton is part of West Midlands Police Force. BCU data was first collected in 2002. Wolverhampton had 646 officers as at 31 March 2002 and 670 as at 31 March 2010.
	This and other related data are published annually as part of the annual Police Service Strength Home Office Statistical Bulletin. The latest bulletin can be found at:
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/policeorg1.html
	and bulletins for this and previous years are deposited in the Library of the House.

Terrorism Act 2006: Arrests

Dominic Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were  (a) arrested for and  (b) charged with an offence under section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006 in each year from 2006 to 2010.

Nick Herbert: holding answer 9 September 2010
	There is no power of arrest within S1 of the Terrorism Act 2006. Individuals suspected of alleged terrorism offences are subject to arrest under S41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
	In relation to  (b), the Home Office does not collate statistics in this way.
	Data on the number of individuals charged under Section 1 and 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006 is included in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin (Operation of Police Powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 and Subsequent Legislation: Arrests, Outcomes and Stops and Searches). The available figures show that one person was charged for offences related to S1 and 2 Terrorism Act 2006 in 2006-07; three individuals were charged in 2007-08; and three individuals were charged in 2008-09.
	A link to the relevant Statistical Bulletin is included in the following website:
	http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/hosb1809.pdf

Boundary Commissions: Internet

Julian Huppert: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the merits of making the Boundary Commission's data publicly available online.

Mark Harper: Clause 10 of the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill requires the Boundary Commissions to take such steps as they see fit to publicise their proposed recommendations. It will therefore be for the Commissions themselves to determine how to publicise relevant data, though at the most recent review the Commissions made use of their websites to publish information about the review. Electorate data for each part of the UK is available from the Office of National Statistics website.

Brighton

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport if he will set out, with statistical evidence relating as closely as possible to Brighton Pavilion constituency, the effects of his Department's policies on that constituency from  (a) May 1997 to April 2010 and  (b) since May 2010.

John Penrose: The impact of the Department's policies, including those delivered by our arms length bodies, on the Brighton Pavilion constituency since 1997 include:
	Digital switchover is due to take place in the Brighton Pavilion in 2011. By the time switchover is complete at the end of 2012, 98.5% of households nationwide will be able to receive digital TV-the same number that can currently receive analogue.
	£53,000 of English Heritage grant offers to the Brighton Pavilion constituency in 2008-09
	£25,149 of Exchequer investment to the Brighton Pavilion constituency provided through Sport England since 2002.
	Almost £70 million of national lottery grants made to applications from the Brighton Pavilion constituency since 1997.
	Almost 100,000 free swims taken in the Brighton and Hove area as part of the Free Swimming programme.
	£9,617,829 given from Arts Council England to organisations based in Brighton Pavilion through the Grants for the Arts programme since 2003.
	£1,689,500 of capital lottery funds allocated by Arts Council England for projects in the Brighton Pavilion constituency undertaken since 2003.
	The Brighton Pavilion constituency has also benefitted from other policies and spending whose impact cannot be broken down by constituency. This includes:
	Over £4 billion of Exchequer funding spent on culture.
	£448.9 million given in grants by English Heritage since 1997.
	More than £5.5 billion invested in sport by the Government and the national lottery since 1997.
	A 68% increase in national museum visits since 1998-99. There were a record 40.3 million visits to the national museums in 2008-09-10% of which were by adults from lower socioeconomic groups.
	50% of buildings removed from the baseline 1999 Buildings at Risk register as their future has been secured.
	90% of all pupils taking part in at least two hours of high quality PE or sport per week in 2008 from an estimated 25% in 2003-04-exceeding our target.
	Since May 2010, Arts Council England has granted £78,767 to organisations based in Brighton Pavilion through the Grants for the Arts programme. The heritage lottery fund has provided £206,200 to the constituency.

Child Benefit: Uprating

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 5 July 2010,  Official Report, column 94W, on child benefit, what estimate he has made of the average real terms change per child in 2010 prices of uprating child benefit payments in line with the retail prices index in  (a) 2011-12,  (b) 2012-13 and  (c) 2013-14.

David Gauke: The following table shows the estimated average change per week per child as a result of uprating the rates of Child Benefit by the change in the Consumer Price Index rather than by the change in the Retail Price Index.
	
		
			  £ 
			   2011-12  2012-13  2013-14 
			 Forecast change 1st child 0.05 -0.10 -0.35 
			 Forecast change subsequent child 0.05 -0.05 -0.25

Child Tax Credit: Cumbernauld

Gregg McClymont: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many families receive the baby element of child tax credit in Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East constituency.

David Gauke: The number of families receiving the baby element in Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East Constituency is 635.
	This analysis is based on provisional information on families receiving tax credits as at April 2010. Further details about this data can be found in the HMRC snapshot publication "Child and Working Tax Credits. Geographical Analysis, April 2010". This is available at:
	http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/personal-tax-credits/cwtc-geog-stats.htm

Child Trust Fund

Richard Graham: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the total sum accumulated in child trust funds to date; and if he will estimate the proportion of that sum which has been contributed  (a) from the public purse and  (b) by individuals;
	(2)  if he will estimate the average gross investment return on child trust funds in each year since their inception;
	(3)  whether his Department holds information on the (a) investment and administration costs and ( b) performance of child trust funds.

Mark Hoban: Statistical data on a range of Child Trust Fund (CTF) information has been published annually; the latest statistics package was made available in November 2009 and can be found at:
	http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ctf/stats.htm
	The total value of funds in CTF accounts at 5 April 2009 was £1,985 million. An estimated £1,300 million of government payments had been made into accounts by this point. However, as the valuation of CTF accounts where the underlying investment is in stocks and shares will vary over time, it is not possible to determine how much of CTFs' current value is made up of government or individuals' contributions.
	Information is not available on the average investment return on sums invested in CTF accounts nor is there any information held on the investment costs, CTF providers' administration costs or performance of CTFs. Government's administrative costs for CTF were £4.8 million in 2008-09.

Departmental Legislation

John Healey: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many officials of his Department are working on preparations for  (a) the Financial Reform Bill,  (b) the National Insurance Bill,  (c) the Terrorist Asset Freezing Bill,  (d) the Equitable Life Contributions Bill and  (e) the Office for Budget Responsibility Bill.

Justine Greening: The following table shows the number of HM Treasury (HMT) staff members working for at least part of their time on the bills named.
	
		
			   Number of HM Treasury staff 
			 Financial Reform Bill 13 
			 National Insurance Bill 3 
			 Terrorist Asset Freezing Bill 6 
			 Equitable Life Contributions Bill 2 
			 Office, for Budget Responsibility Bill 5 
		
	
	Where appropriate HMT staff members will consult with other Government Departments and other teams within HMT.

Departmental Operating Costs

Andrew Stephenson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he has taken to reduce the running costs of his Department since his appointment.

Justine Greening: The Treasury Group has committed to finding £6 million of savings from its administration costs this year as part of the Government's £6.2 billion savings programme. From 24 May it has implemented a freeze on external recruitment posts which are not business critical, and required ministerial approval for all new consultancy spend over £20,000 and any public sector salaries above £142,500. It has also completed a review of all programmes over£1 million with a significant IT element.
	As part of this, £200,000 will be saved from reducing the use of allocated ministerial cars, £125,000 from a 5% reduction in ministerial salaries and £400,000 from a reduction in bonus payments to members of the senior civil service. The Treasury has also revised its travel and expenses policies, to include tighter restrictions on the provision of refreshments for officials and on the use of first class travel and taxis.

Low Incomes: Females

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the contribution of the Minister for Equalities of 6 September 2010,  Official Report, column 153, what new ways of assessing the potential impact of Budget measures on women his Department plans to explore.

David Gauke: At the June Budget this Government took unprecedented steps in publishing more detailed analysis of the distributional impacts of the Budget than has even been done before. In addition to this, and as stated by the Minister for Equalities at the adjournment debate on public expenditure reductions, the Treasury also remains open to exploring new ways of assessing and presenting the potential impact of Budget measures.

Public Expenditure

Andrew George: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what steps he plans to take to ensure that the implementation of the proposals in the  (a) June 2010 Budget and  (b) Spending Review will protect the vulnerable;
	(2)  what mechanisms he plans to put in place to assess the effects of the implementation of the proposals contained in the  (a) Budget and  (b) Spending Review on the most vulnerable.

Justine Greening: The June 2010 Budget announced a package of reforms to tackle unaffordable spending and support the most vulnerable, with measures announced in the Budget having no measurable impact on child poverty over the next two years. At this Budget the Government also showed their commitment to transparency by taking unprecedented steps in publishing more detailed analysis of the distributional impacts of the Budget than had even been done before.
	Regarding the spending review, the document "Spending Review Framework" sets out that the Government will:
	"look closely at the effects of its decisions on different groups in society, especially the least well off" (2.2 page 7).
	The Government also produces the annual "Households Below Average Income" publication which provides details of composition and the number of households with low income levels. This, along with other data sources, are reviewed regularly to help the Government understand the impacts of policy change.

Public Expenditure

Andrew George: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the most recent Institute for Fiscal Studies analysis of the impact of  (a) Budget and  (b) Spending Review measures on (i) low income families, (ii) the economic recovery and (iii) the overall Budget objectives.

Justine Greening: The Treasury welcomes the innovative approach the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) has taken to its revised analysis of the Budget and is open to exploring new ways of assessing the potential impact of Budget measures. However as the IFS states, in order to include previously un-modelled reforms, the report makes a number of assumptions which add uncertainty to the analysis. It is important that policy is informed by analysis that is proven to be robust. The Treasury has relied on a well-established methodology, similar to that adopted by the IFS in its post-Budget analysis. On the basis of this robust approach, the Budget is progressive and has no measurable impact on child poverty over the next two years.
	The Government take account of a range of external views, including those of the IFS, when making its assessment of the UK economy and in policy formulation. The interim Office for Budget Responsibility provided an assessment of the UK economy, which took account of Budget measures on 22 June.
	It is not appropriate to pre-judge the outcomes of the spending review process, but it should be noted that the Government set out in the spending review framework that they will "look closely at the effects of its decisions on different groups in society, especially the least well off, and on different regions."

Tax Allowances

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what recent estimate he has made of the number of people who will have earnings of below £6,475 in 2010-11;
	(2)  what estimate he has made of the average amount of additional income to people in each income decile from the planned increase in the personal tax allowance;
	(3)  what estimate he has made of the proportion of the total additional income from the planned increase in the personal tax allowance which will go to people in each income decile;
	(4)  what estimate he has made of the proportion of the total additional income from the planned increase in the personal tax allowance which will go to those earning between £6,475 and £7,475.

David Gauke: The June 2010 Budget announced a £1,000 increase in the personal allowance for under 65s to £7,475 in 2011-12, with benefits focussed on individuals on low and middle incomes through accompanying changes to the basic rate limit and national insurance upper earnings and profit limits.
	As a result of these measures 880,000 of the lowest income taxpayers will be removed from tax altogether. It is estimated that those on incomes below £7,475 account for around 0.8% of total incomes above the personal allowance before the Budget announcement and 1.4% of the total benefits. These estimates are based on HMRC's personal tax model, based on 2007-08 Survey of Personal Incomes data projected to 2011-12.
	Estimated impacts of these Budget announcements for all households by equivalised income decile in 2011-12 are provided in the table.
	
		
			  Equivalised income decile( 1)  Average gain from combined income tax and national insurance changes( 2)  Proportion of total change 
			   £ per year  % net income  
			 Bottom 30 0.2 2.1 
			 2 (£14,000) 70 0.4 4.8 
			 3 (£16,700) 100 0.5 7.4 
			 4 (£18,900) 120 0.6 8.8 
			 5 (£21,300) 160 0.6 11.1 
			 6 (£24,200) 190 0.7 13.6 
			 7 (£27,400) 230 0.7 16.3 
			 8 (£31,600) 230 0.6 16.1 
			 9 (£37,600) 230 0.5 16.1 
			 Top (£48,500) 50 0.1 3.9 
			 All 140 0.4 100.0 
			 (1) Estimated lower income bound (for a couple household with no children) for each decile is shown in brackets.  (2) Excluding the June 2010 Budget announcement to increase the threshold for employer national insurance contributions by £21 a week above indexation. 
		
	
	Average household gains are lower than average in the lower deciles of the household income distribution because there are fewer basic rate taxpayers per household.
	These estimates have been produced using HM Treasury's tax and benefit model, based on expenditure and food survey data projected to 2011-12. These estimates relate to changes to the personal allowance and national insurance upper limits announced in Budget 2010 only. Based on these same sources, it is estimated that around 9 million individuals have total income subject to income tax less than 6,475 in 2010-11.
	Budget 2010 Annex A provides a fuller analysis of changes to personal tax, tax credits, benefits, and indirect tax in 2012-13.

Tax Evasion: VAT

Clive Efford: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what criteria HM Revenue and Customs applies when taking the decision not to issue companies with section 160 and 161 notices before a company is investigated for alleged value added tax evasion; and if he will make a statement.

David Gauke: HMRC publish public notices, codes of practice and factsheets to explain their processes so that taxpayers have the information to understand how they should manage their tax affairs and ensure their rights are protected.
	Public Notices 160 and 161 set out HMRC's practice in relation to civil enquiries where they suspect tax irregularities as a result of dishonesty. They are issued to businesses where HMRC have information that leads them to suspect the trader of dishonest conduct which, if proven, may result in the imposition of a civil evasion penalty. The notices detail the circumstances in which they are considered appropriate.
	HMRC have a variety of other remedies available to deal with suspected evasion, up to and including criminal investigation. The Department's criminal investigation policy is published on the HMRC website.

VAT: Registration

Simon Kirby: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what discussions he has had with the Chief Executive of HM Revenue and Customs on the issuing of value added tax registration numbers to new businesses; and if he will make a statement.

David Gauke: Treasury Ministers have discussions with the chief executive of HMRC on a regular basis as part of the process of policy development and delivery. It is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such discussions.
	While HMRC aim to issue VAT registration numbers as quickly as possible, it is necessary to balance the speed of registration against the need to undertake further checks on some applications to safeguard the VAT system against fraud.

Civil Servants: North East and North West

Ian Swales: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many civil servants employed by  (a) Government Departments,  (b) executive agencies and  (c) other Government bodies had their primary place of employment in (i) Redcar constituency, (ii) the North East and (iii) the North West in each of the last five years.

Nick Hurd: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck:
	 As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question concerning how many civil servants employed by (a) Government departments, (b) executive agencies and (c) other Government employers had their primary place of employment in i) Redcar constituency, ii) the North East and iii) the North West in each of the last five years. (15839).
	I regret that estimates of the numbers of civil servants employed by Government departments, executive agencies and other Government employers by constituency are not available.
	Estimates for the North East and North West are based on the Mandate collection (2005-2006) which provides approximately 90 per cent coverage of Civil Service departments and agencies and the Annual Civil Service Employment Survey (2007-2009) which provides 100 per cent coverage. The requested data are attached at Annex A.
	 Annex A
	
		
			  Civil service employment, Government Departments, executive agencies and other Government bodies in the North East and North West( 1) , all employees 
			  Headcount 
			   2005( 2,3)  2006( 2,3)  2007( 4)  2008( 4)  2009( 5) 
			   North East  North West  North East  North West  North East  North West  North East  North West  North East  North West 
			 Government Departments 18,540 22,080 18,170 23,430 16,920 23,090 16,480 22,800 17,540 23,690 
			 Executive agencies 17,190 35,900 16,440 33,020 19,580 40,170 18,340 40,360 16,880 37,210 
			 Other government bodies 80 1,470 80 1,430 140 1,740 120 1,690 1,720 4,000 
			
			 All employees 35,800 59,440 34,690 57,880 36,640 64,990 35,440 64,850 36,130 64,900 
			 (1) Numbers are rounded to the nearest ten.  (2) Mandate Data Collection only-incomplete coverage of civil service departments.  (3) Survey reference date 1 April.  (4) Survey reference date 30 September.  (5) Survey reference date 31 March.   Source:  Annual Civil Service Employment survey and Mandate Data Collection.

Government Departments: Internet

Andrew Stephenson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many websites operated by Government departments there were in each year since 2006.

Francis Maude: No central records are held with accurate figures for the total number of websites operated by central Government and non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) going back to 2006. Many websites were not reported and through work done by the coalition Government from 11 May 2010, we have already identified a further 81. The current number of open websites reported by Government Departments on 10 August 2010 is 742 that are operated by Departments and their NDPBs plus 103 operated by museums, charities, limited companies and partnerships in which government have a role. I shall be announcing plans alongside the spending review to close up to 75% of sites for which government are responsible.

Government Departments: Publicity

Philip Davies: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what  (a) legislation and  (b) guidance issued by his Department governs the content of publications funded from the public purse.

Francis Maude: The information requested is as follows:
	  (a) There is no legislation "issued by" Cabinet Office governing the content of publications
	  (b) Guidance issued by Cabinet Office that governs the content of publications is available on The Cabinet Office website in the form of a downloadable pdf. There is a writing guide, editorial guide and publication guidelines for consistency in production of publications.